Case 2500747/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Palmer First v Gap Organics Limited Second Respondent: Gap Group North East Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2500747/2024
- Decision date
- 2 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspden Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Palmer First
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a public video hearing in Newcastle on 14 November 2024, Employment Judge Aspden considered a strike-out application. The tribunal struck out the claimant's complaints that his dismissal was automatically unfair under section 104 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and that he had a Working Time Regulations 1998 holiday pay claim, holding that those complaints had no reasonable prospect of success.
The tribunal did not strike out the separate claim form allegation that the first and/or second respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and/or breached contract by failing to pay a sum due for accrued, untaken holiday on termination of employment. That claim remained live after this order. No monetary award was made or assessed in the decision.
The written record states that reasons for disputed decisions were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested in time. This order therefore records only the strike-out ruling and the surviving holiday-pay-related claim, without any merits findings on the latter.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Automatic unfair dismissal complaint pleaded under section 104 of the Employment Rights Act 1996; struck out because it had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Complaint about outstanding or unpaid holiday pay insofar as it was a claim under the Working Time Regulations 1998; struck out because it had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim that the first and/or second respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages and/or breached contract by failing to pay accrued, untaken holiday on termination was not struck out; no merits decision was made in this order. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- no reasonable prospect of success
- section 104 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Working Time Regulations 1998
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.