Case 2411757/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Gilpin Mr S Puzhakkal v AAO UK Services Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2411757/2023
- Decision date
- 8 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ross Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Gilpin Mr S Puzhakkal
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered the claimants' claim for a redundancy payment. It recorded that section 155 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 provides that employees do not have the right to a redundancy payment unless they have been employed for two years or more.
The tribunal found that the claimants had been employed by the respondent for less than two years and therefore did not have the right to a redundancy payment. The claimants were given an opportunity to explain why the redundancy payment claim should not be struck out, but did not give an acceptable reason. The redundancy payment claim was struck out, with other complaints unaffected by the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The judgment states only that the claim for a redundancy payment is struck out and that the claimants' other complaints are not affected by this judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Section 155 of the 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.