Case 4102254/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs D McGowan v Grant Property Solutions Ltd — 2018
- Case reference
- 4102254/2017
- Decision date
- 13 February 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge F Jane Garvie
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs D McGowan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Mrs McGowan started work with Grant Property Solutions Ltd on 15 June 2015 and moved into a revised Portfolio Manager role on 11 April 2016. At a meeting on 18 May 2017, Mr Hutton told her that her employment was ending with immediate effect because of performance, and that she would be paid one month's notice pay in lieu. The tribunal also recorded that she was not given a dismissal letter at the time, later sent grievance and appeal letters, and was subsequently paid in the respondent's June payroll, with a further three days' pay later made when she queried the notice period calculation.
The issue for determination was whether the effective date of termination was 18 May 2017 or a later date tied to the notice payment. Applying section 97(1)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the tribunal held that the claimant's employment was terminated verbally without notice on 18 May 2017 and that the later payment in lieu of notice did not extend the employment relationship to 15 or 18 June 2017. It also accepted the claimant's own evidence that she was dismissed with immediate effect on 18 May 2017.
Because the tribunal found that the effective date of termination was 18 May 2017, it concluded that the claimant had less than two years' continuous employment for the purposes of section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal therefore held that it had no jurisdiction to consider the unfair dismissal complaint and dismissed it.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the claimant had not completed two years' continuous employment by the effective date of termination, so it had no jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
8 references- s.97(1)(b) ERA 1996
- s.108 ERA 1996
- s.94 ERA 1996
- Delaney v Staples
- Locke v Candy and Candy Ltd
- Cosmeceutical Ltd v Parkin Baillie
- IPC Business Press Ltd v Gray
- Adams v GKN Sankey Ltd
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.