Case 2500586/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Henderson v Automotive Group — 2024
- Case reference
- 2500586/2024
- Decision date
- 7 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin Representation
- Venue
- Newcastle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Henderson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr G Henderson brought a claim of unfair dismissal against Automotive Group. Neither party attended the CVP hearing on 1 July 2024. The claimant's representative emailed the tribunal on 30 June 2024 saying that, in light of earlier communication about the claimant's lack of two years' continuous service, the claimant had decided not to pursue the claim and would not contest the proceedings.
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim. It found that the claimant did not have two years' continuous service and had not provided further information to show that the claim fell within one of the exceptions under section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996. The judgment states that the tribunal therefore had no jurisdiction to hear the claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held it had no jurisdiction because the claimant did not have two years' continuous service and did not provide further information to bring the claim within an exception under section 108 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.