Case 1600490/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ms T Bond v Mrs J Large trading as Lads’ and Dads’ Barbers — 2019
- Case reference
- 1600490/2018
- Decision date
- 16 February 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms T Bond
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Bond brought claims of wrongful dismissal and unfair dismissal against Mrs J Large trading as Lads' and Dads' Barbers. At the preliminary hearing on 5 February 2019, the tribunal recorded that the wrongful dismissal claim was dismissed because it had been withdrawn.
The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed because the claimant did not have two years' qualifying employment immediately prior to the date of dismissal. No monetary award was made.
The claimant also applied to amend the claim to add a complaint of automatic unfair dismissal for asserting a statutory right, including entitlement to a written statement of employment particulars. That application was refused.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment states that the claim was dismissed because it had been withdrawn. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the claimant did not have two years' qualifying employment immediately prior to the date of dismissal. | Dismissed | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.