Case 2417269/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Thompson v LBS Worldwide Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2417269/2018
- Decision date
- 2 May 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Parkin REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Thompson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing held in Manchester on 2 May 2019, Regional Employment Judge Parkin considered whether Miss C Thompson had sufficient continuous employment to bring her unfair dismissal claim against LBS Worldwide Ltd.
The tribunal held that, applying section 212(3)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the claimant did have sufficient continuous employment for the purposes of section 108 of the Act. The judgment therefore allowed the unfair dismissal claim to proceed; it did not determine the merits of the dismissal itself or record any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Preliminary hearing only. The tribunal found, applying section 212(3)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, that the claimant had sufficient continuous employment for the purposes of section 108 to pursue her unfair dismissal claim. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 212(3)(c) ERA 1996
- section 108 ERA 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
- Open official judgment 4 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.