Case 2300949/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Neckles, solicitor For the v Respondent — 2019
- Case reference
- 2300949/2019
- Decision date
- 20 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Siddall Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr J Neckles, solicitor For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 20 November 2019, Employment Judge Siddall struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the Claimant did not have two years' service at the date of the alleged dismissal, recorded as 16 October 2018. The judgment also struck out the breach of contract claim in relation to notice pay because it was brought out of time.
The tribunal held that the unlawful deductions from wages claim was made in time and could proceed. No final merits decision was made on that claim at this hearing, and the tribunal directed that there would be a further telephone preliminary hearing on 4 February 2020 to give directions and list the case for hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out because the Claimant did not have two years' service at the date of the alleged dismissal on 16 October 2018. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Struck out in relation to notice pay because it was brought out of time. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that this claim was made in time and allowed it to proceed to a further preliminary hearing. | Other | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.