Case 2202771/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Johnson v Danish Bake UK t/a Ole & Steen — 2019
- Case reference
- 2202771/2019
- Decision date
- 17 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Professor
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Johnson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a re-scheduled preliminary hearing on 17 December 2019, the Tribunal considered the Claimant’s ET1, which referred to the Working Time Regulations 1998. After discussion and clarification, the Claimant agreed that she was not bringing claims for non-payment of notice money or wages, that those sums had been paid, and that she was not alleging discrimination.
The Claimant also accepted that the concerns underlying the claim related in part to her contract of employment, but after discussion of the contract, including Part 7 dealing with hours of work, she conceded that she was not able to identify any breach of contract by the Respondent. The Tribunal further recorded that there was no provision in the Working Time Regulations 1998 on which she could rely for the complaint as framed in Box 8.1 of the ET1, described as working hours and breach of respite time during shifts.
The Tribunal noted that if the Claimant were seeking to argue unfair dismissal, that would fall within Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and she did not have the necessary period of qualifying service to bring such a claim. In light of those clarifications, the Tribunal held that the claim had no reasonable prospect of success and struck it out in its entirety under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Working time regulations | The claim form referred to the Working Time Regulations 1998 and the complaint was described as working hours and breach of respite time periods during shifts. The Tribunal held that the Claimant could not point to any provision of the Working Time Regulations she could rely on, and struck the claim out as having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- Working Time Regulations 1998
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.