Case 2202001/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Hammond v Single Homeless Project — 2024
- Case reference
- 2202001/2024
- Decision date
- 23 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Millns Representations
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Hammond
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant did not attend the hearing. The tribunal clerk contacted him and was told he was unwell and unable to attend. He had not applied for an adjournment and had not written to the tribunal to explain his absence.
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim under Rule 37(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 and Rule 2. Taking the claim at its highest, the claimant's stated employment dates of 7 June 2022 to 1 December 2023 meant he did not have the two years' service required to bring an unfair dismissal claim, so it was found to have no reasonable prospect of success.
The remaining race discrimination and wrongful dismissal complaints were not fully particularised, and the tribunal recorded that the claimant had failed to comply with the case management orders of Employment Judge A Stewart dated 4 June 2024. The respondent's application for strike out or a deposit order in respect of those claims was refused, and the tribunal made an unless order in a separate order.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under Rule 37(1)(a) because, taking the claim at its highest, the claimant's stated employment dates of 7 June 2022 to 1 December 2023 meant he did not have two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal claim. The claimant did not attend the hearing and had not applied to adjourn. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Respondent's application for strike out or a deposit order was refused. The tribunal said the claim was not fully particularised and noted non-compliance with the case management orders dated 4 June 2024. An unless order was made separately; no merits determination was made. | Other | Race | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Respondent's application for strike out or a deposit order was refused. The tribunal said the claim was not fully particularised and noted non-compliance with the case management orders dated 4 June 2024. An unless order was made separately; no merits determination was made. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 37(1)(a) Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 2 (overriding objective)
- two years' service requirement for unfair dismissal
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.