Case 2414434/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Phillip v Reed Specialist Recruitment — 2020
- Case reference
- 2414434/2019
- Decision date
- 24 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Buzzard REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Liverpool
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Phillip
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr B Phillip pursued a complaint of unfair dismissal only against Reed Specialist Recruitment Limited. The case was heard at Liverpool on 18 March 2020 before Employment Judge Buzzard, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by counsel.
The tribunal found that the claimant had been employed by the respondent for less than two years. Applying section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, it held that he did not have the qualifying service needed to bring an unfair dismissal claim. The claim was therefore dismissed.
The judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claimant pursued unfair dismissal only. The tribunal found he had been employed for less than two years and was therefore not entitled to proceed under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.