Case 4100057/2020 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4100057/2020 Mr J Black v Amity Hospitality — 2020
- Case reference
- 4100057/2020
- Decision date
- 5 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Whitcombe Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4100057/2020 Mr J Black
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claimant's unfair dismissal claim under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 on the ground that it had no reasonable prospect of success. In its reasons, the tribunal said that, on the face of it, the claimant lacked the necessary qualifying service to bring an unfair dismissal claim and did not assert any type of unfair dismissal exempt from that requirement.
The tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity on 21 February 2020 to provide written reasons by 28 February 2020 explaining why the claim should not be struck out. It found that no acceptable reason was provided, and accordingly struck out that part of the claim. The judgment states that the other claims were unaffected.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under rule 37(1)(a) on the basis that the claim had no reasonable prospect of success. The tribunal said the claimant appeared to lack the necessary qualifying service and did not claim any exempt type of unfair dismissal. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37(1)(a) Employment Tribunals Rules 2013
- no reasonable prospect of success
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.