Case 4109716/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Allen v City Facilities Management (UK) Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 4109716/2021
- Decision date
- 19 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge I McFatridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Allen
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a Preliminary Hearing held by Cloud Video Platform on 14 October 2021, the claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by P Singh. The tribunal refused the claimant's application to amend the claim to bring a claim of age discrimination.
The tribunal also held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider a complaint of unfair dismissal on the basis that the claimant was dismissed for exercising a statutory right in terms of Section 104 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant's claim was dismissed. Oral reasons were given at the hearing, and the written judgment records no remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The claimant's application to amend the claim to bring an age discrimination claim was refused; no merits determination of age discrimination is recorded. | Other | Age | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the unfair dismissal complaint based on dismissal for exercising a statutory right under Section 104 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and the claim was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Section 104 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.