Case 4100499/2021 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND)5 Case No: 4100499/2021 Hearing Held by Cloud Video Platform (CVP) on June 2021 Employment Judge - A Strain Mr M Jones v Respondent — 2021
- Case reference
- 4100499/2021
- Decision date
- 29 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Alan Strain
Parties
1 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND)5 Case No: 4100499/2021 Hearing Held by Cloud Video Platform (CVP) on June 2021 Employment Judge - A Strain Mr M Jones
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with a preliminary issue in Mr M Jones's case against Chetu Ltd. It found that he had continuity of service with the respondent from 30 September 2018 until 15 October 2020.
On that basis, the tribunal held that it had jurisdiction to deal with his complaint of unfair dismissal. The judgment does not contain findings on liability for dismissal itself and records no remedy.
Oral reasons were given at the conclusion of the hearing. The written judgment is limited to the continuity and jurisdiction issue.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Preliminary issue only. The tribunal found the claimant had continuity of service with the respondent from 30 September 2018 to 15 October 2020 and therefore had jurisdiction to deal with the unfair dismissal complaint. The judgment does not decide the merits of the dismissal claim or record any remedy. | Other | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.