Case 2400210/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Byrne v Lodore Falls Hotel & Spa — 2024
- Case reference
- 2400210/2024
- Decision date
- 26 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Byrne
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant’s unfair dismissal complaint in this judgment. It found that Mr J Byrne had been employed by Lodore Falls Hotel & Spa for less than two years, so he did not have the qualifying service required to bring an unfair dismissal claim under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant was given the opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but he did not provide an acceptable reason. On that basis, the complaint of unfair dismissal was struck out.
The judgment expressly stated that the claimant’s other complaints for unauthorised deduction from wages and breach of contract (notice) were not affected by this decision. Those claims were to be determined at the hearing listed for 3 July 2024, with the time allocation reduced from one day to two hours.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the claimant had been employed for less than two years, so he was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. He did not give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity, why the complaint should not be struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.108 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.
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.