Case 2414103/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Grierson v Cohens Chemist (Gorgemead Ltd) — 2020
- Case reference
- 2414103/2019
- Decision date
- 3 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Franey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Grierson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the unfair dismissal complaint. It recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service to bring such a complaint, and found that Mr Grierson had been employed by Cohens Chemist (Gorgemead Ltd) for less than two years.
On that basis, the tribunal held that he was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal claim. It also found that he had not given an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so, why the complaint should not be struck out. The unfair dismissal complaint was therefore struck out.
The tribunal stated that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this judgment and would be considered at the hearing on 20 January 2020 to decide whether they had been presented within time.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service and was therefore not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 1996; the claimant did not give an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.