Case 1800181/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Bell v Samuel Smith Old Brewery (Tadcaster) — 2023
- Case reference
- 1800181/2023
- Decision date
- 17 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Bell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant complained of unfair dismissal against Samuel Smith Old Brewery (Tadcaster). The Tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint.
The Tribunal relied on Section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, which requires at least two years' employment before an unfair dismissal complaint can be brought, subject to exceptions for certain automatically unfair dismissal complaints. The judgment records that the claimant was employed by the respondent for less than two years and that none of the exceptions seemed to apply.
The Tribunal had written to the claimant giving him an opportunity to explain why the unfair dismissal claim should not be struck out. The claimant emailed asking how he could appeal against the strike-out, but did not provide any argument or explanation as to why the complaint should not be struck out. The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints are not affected by this judgment; only the unfair dismissal complaint was adjudicated here. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
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.