In person For the v Respondent — 2024

Mr Samuel Giddings presented a claim on 24 July 2023 saying he was making a claim for unfair dismissal because of health and safety issues, including complaints about training requests and promised training. The tribunal recorded that he did not have sufficient continuity of employment to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim under s.98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, because his employment began on 10 January 2022 and ended on 26 April 2023.

Anglian Demolition & Asbestos Limited said the claimant was dismissed for capability after three incidents on 12, 19 and 21 April 2023 in which, while operating plant machinery, he caused damage with health and safety and financial consequences. The tribunal noted that an investigation and appeal took place, and that the appeal outcome upheld dismissal on the basis that continuing to employ him as a plant operator would be a danger to himself and other employees.

At the full merits hearing the respondent applied to strike out the claim under Rule 37. The tribunal held that none of the s.100 subsections relied on could apply on the facts found, including because the claimant was not designated to carry out health and safety functions, was not a health and safety representative, was not shown to be in circumstances of serious and imminent danger, and had not established the necessary causal link between any health and safety concern and the dismissal. The tribunal therefore concluded that the claim had no reasonable prospect of success and struck it out at the outset of the hearing.