Case 1805399/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Singh v HORIZON EXECUTIVES Ltd T/A Future Renovations — 2021
- Case reference
- 1805399/2021
- Decision date
- 4 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maidment
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Singh
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the complaint of unfair dismissal. It gave the claimant an opportunity by letter dated 20 October 2021 to make representations or request a hearing on whether the claim should be struck out because he had not been employed by the respondent for two years or more, and he replied by email on 31 October 2021.
In the reasons, Employment Judge Maidment recorded that the claimant said he had not been dismissed. The tribunal stated that, even if there had been a dismissal, it had no jurisdiction to hear an unfair dismissal claim where the employee had less than two years' service unless an exception applied.
The tribunal noted that exceptions exist for certain automatically unfair reasons, but said that no such reason was suggested in this claim. The only adjudicated outcome was therefore strike out of the unfair dismissal complaint. The tribunal also noted that the claimant's remaining claim remained listed and the respondent's response was awaited.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out because the claimant was not employed by the respondent for two years or more. The tribunal noted that no automatically unfair reason was suggested, and recorded that the claimant said he had not been dismissed. | 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.