Case 4106859/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Number: 4106859/2024 Miss J Byrne v BiP Solutions Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 4106859/2024
- Decision date
- 28 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Donnell Case
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Number: 4106859/2024 Miss J Byrne
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered only the unfair dismissal claim pleaded in the ET1. It noted that Miss J Byrne did not have two years' service with BiP Solutions Limited, which is normally required for an unfair dismissal claim under section 108(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and that the ET1 did not, on its face, plead an automatic unfair dismissal claim disapplying that service requirement.
At a previous case management hearing the issue had been raised with the claimant, and she was given the opportunity to comment before any decision was made. Her correspondence of 23 July 2025 did not address the two-year service point and instead asserted that her dismissal claim was under the Equality Act rather than the Employment Rights Act. The tribunal said that the unfair dismissal claim under the Employment Rights Act remained live and that no submission had been made showing reasonable prospects of success.
The tribunal therefore struck out the unfair dismissal claim under rule 38(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024. It stated for the avoidance of doubt that no other claim fell within the scope of this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under rule 38(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024 because the claim had no reasonable prospect of success; the tribunal also said it had no jurisdiction because the claimant did not have two years' service and the ET1 did not plead automatic unfair dismissal. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 38(1)(a) Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024
- s.108(1) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.94 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.