Case 2307709/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Durber v Sir Robert McAlpine Ltd and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 2307709/2023
- Decision date
- 23 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hart Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr Durber
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claimant’s redundancy payment claim. It held that section 155 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years’ employment for a redundancy payment, and found that Mr Durber had been employed for less than two years. On that basis, the tribunal concluded he did not have a right to a redundancy payment.
The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out, but the tribunal found that he had not provided an acceptable reason. The judgment states that the claimant’s other complaints were not affected by this decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal held that the claimant had been employed for less than two years and therefore had no right to a redundancy payment under section 155 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out, but no acceptable reason was provided. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.155 Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.