Case 4108520/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Napier v Kier Group plc — 2021
- Case reference
- 4108520/2021
- Decision date
- 30 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Kemp
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Napier
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was considered on written documents. The claimant had attended a preliminary hearing on 18 June 2021 and was ordered to provide further and better particulars of his claim by 16 July 2021. The tribunal noted that the claim form ticked unfair dismissal, but that the claimant did not have the two years' continuous service needed for an ordinary unfair dismissal claim under section 94 Employment Rights Act 1996.
At the preliminary hearing the claimant said he intended to make a claim about health and safety matters. He did not provide the ordered particulars. After an email on 20 July 2021 warned that the judge was considering strike out under Rule 37 and gave him seven days to respond, he did not respond.
The tribunal found that the claimant had not provided any basis for a claim competently before the Employment Tribunal despite the opportunities given. Applying Rule 37, the overriding objective, and the two-stage strike out approach referred to in Dolby and Hassan, the tribunal struck out the claim for non-compliance with an order.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claimant ticked unfair dismissal in the claim form. The tribunal noted he did not have two years' continuous service for an ordinary unfair dismissal claim under section 94 Employment Rights Act 1996, and struck out the claim for non-compliance with an order to provide further and better particulars. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | The claimant indicated at the preliminary hearing that he intended to make a claim in relation to health and safety matters, but did not provide the ordered further and better particulars. The precise statutory basis was not identified in the judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 37 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- overriding objective
- HM Prison Service v Dolby two-stage test
- Hassan v Tesco Stores Ltd two-stage test
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.