Case 4103080/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Berry v W & L Electrical Services Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 4103080/2023
- Decision date
- 30 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge C McManus
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Berry
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, in a corrected judgment issued after a certificate of correction, held that Mr C Berry's unfair dismissal complaint was time barred under section 111(2)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and dismissed it. The judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and does not contain any merits findings on the dismissal issue.
The tribunal also held that the claimant's complaints of non-payment of wages for accrued but unpaid holidays, unlawful deductions from wages, and notice pay were time barred under section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and were dismissed. No monetary award was made. The written judgment was dated 30 January 2024.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed as time barred under section 111(2)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Complaint of non-payment of wages for accrued but unpaid holidays; dismissed as time barred under section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Complaint of unlawful deductions from wages; dismissed as time barred under section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Complaint of notice pay; dismissed as time barred under section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Employment Rights Act 1996 s111(2)(b)
- Employment Rights Act 1996 s23
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.