Case 3313328/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 3313328/2023
- Decision date
- 20 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anderson Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered the respondent's applications concerning the claimant's unfair dismissal claim and breach of contract allegations. The claimant had been dismissed for gross misconduct on 11 October 2023, appealed, and was reinstated from 5 January 2024 with pay for the intervening period.
The tribunal held that, because the claimant had appealed and been reinstated, the dismissal could not found an ordinary unfair dismissal claim and the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it. It also held that the tribunal had no jurisdiction over the breach of contract allegations because the claimant remained employed and his contract continued following reinstatement.
Although the applications were brought as strike out applications, the tribunal dismissed the claims on jurisdictional grounds rather than striking them out. The judgment noted that the claimant's whistleblowing and disability discrimination claims remained live and were not the subject of this decision.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the tribunal found it had no jurisdiction following reinstatement of the claimant's employment on internal appeal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction while the claimant remained employed; the judgment referred to allegations about excessive working hours and breach of a mobility clause. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules
- Rule 39 of the Employment Tribunal Rules
- Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994/1623
- Marangakis v Iceland Foods Ltd [2022] EAT 161
- Roberts v West Coast Trains Ltd 2004 ICR 254 CA
- Cox v Adecco Group UK & Ireland and Ors 2021 ICR 1307, EAT
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.