Case 1803218/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Hartley and Mrs E Hartley v Harewood and Upton Recreational Club — 2023
- Case reference
- 1803218/2023
- Decision date
- 10 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brain Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Hartley and Mrs E Hartley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy letter dated 21 June 2023, the tribunal gave Mr M Hartley and Mrs E Hartley an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on why their unfair dismissal complaints should not be struck out. The stated reason was that each claimant had less than two years' service and therefore did not have sufficient qualifying service to bring an unfair dismissal claim.
The claimants did not make written representations, or did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. Employment Judge Brain accordingly struck out the complaints of unfair dismissal in the judgment dated 10 July 2023. The judgment records no substantive merits determination and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the complaints of unfair dismissal by Mr M Hartley and Mrs E Hartley (case numbers 1803218/2023 and 1803219/2023) were struck out because each claimant had less than two years' service and therefore insufficient qualifying service to pursue the claim. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.