Case 2201856/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Middleton v Samuel Smith (Southern) — 2023
- Case reference
- 2201856/2023
- Decision date
- 12 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Varnam
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Middleton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy letter dated 4 April 2023, the tribunal gave Mr C Middleton an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on why his unfair dismissal claim should not be struck out. The stated reason was that the claim had no reasonable prospect of success because he did not have sufficient qualifying service to bring an unfair dismissal claim.
Mr Middleton did not make any written representations and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the unfair dismissal claim pursuant to rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.
The judgment states that the claimant’s other claims were not struck out and that separate case management orders were issued in respect of those claims. No remedy was awarded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under rule 37 after the tribunal raised that the claim had no reasonable prospect of success because the claimant did not have sufficient qualifying service to bring an unfair dismissal 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.
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.