Case 1602908/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Respondent: Miss J Cullen Gorgemead Ltd trading as Cohens Group JUDGMENT The claim of unfair dismissal is struck out. This does not affect the remaining claims which will proceed to a final hearing. REASONS 1. By a letter of 6 February 2024 the Tribunal gave the Claimant an opportunity to make representations or to request a hearing as to why the complaint of unfair dismissal should not be struck out because she did not have sufficient service. 2. The Claimant failed to make representations and her representative agreed at today’s hearing that it should be struck out. _________________________________ Employment Judge Sharp Dated: 27 February 2024 ORDER SENT TO THE PARTIES ON 28 February 2024 FOR THE SECRETARY TO EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Mr N Roche v Miss J Cullen Gorgemead Ltd trading as Cohens Group — 2024
- Case reference
- 1602908/2023
- Decision date
- 28 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sharp Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Respondent: Miss J Cullen Gorgemead Ltd trading as Cohens Group JUDGMENT The claim of unfair dismissal is struck out. This does not affect the remaining claims which will proceed to a final hearing. REASONS 1. By a letter of 6 February 2024 the Tribunal gave the Claimant an opportunity to make representations or to request a hearing as to why the complaint of unfair dismissal should not be struck out because she did not have sufficient service. 2. The Claimant failed to make representations and her representative agreed at today’s hearing that it should be struck out. _________________________________ Employment Judge Sharp Dated: 27 February 2024 ORDER SENT TO THE PARTIES ON 28 February 2024 FOR THE SECRETARY TO EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Mr N Roche
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the Claimant's unfair dismissal claim. It recorded that, by letter dated 6 February 2024, the Claimant had been given an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out because she did not have sufficient service.
The Claimant did not make representations, and her representative agreed at the hearing on 27 February 2024 that the unfair dismissal claim should be struck out. The judgment states that this order did not affect the remaining claims, which were to proceed to a final hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint because the Claimant did not have sufficient service. The tribunal had given the Claimant an opportunity by letter dated 6 February 2024 to make representations or request a hearing; no representations were made and the Claimant's representative agreed at the hearing that the claim should be struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
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.
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.