Case 2201941/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A. Lewis v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 2201941/2024
- Decision date
- 1 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Goodman
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr A. Lewis
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr A. Lewis presented claims on 17 February 2024 for unfair dismissal and unpaid wages. He said he had been suspended after an altercation with a supervisor. The respondent said he had been dismissed on 5 February following an investigation, that a week’s notice had been paid in the March payroll, and that pay for the suspension period had been paid in the April payroll.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal said the claimant had only three months' service, so the unfair dismissal claim had no reasonable prospect of success because the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The money claim was struck out because it was not actively pursued; the respondent said the claimant had been paid a week's notice in the March payroll and suspension pay in the April payroll, and the claimant did not reply. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 37 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- no reasonable prospect of success
- not actively pursued
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.