Case 6002499/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr F Gower v Erif UK Ltd c/o J Seabrook — 2024
- Case reference
- 6002499/2024
- Decision date
- 17 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Self
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr F Gower
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal, sitting under Employment Judge Self, struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. The reason given was that the claimant did not have the required qualifying service to bring an unfair dismissal claim under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and no exemption appeared to apply. The Tribunal had previously written to the claimant on 31 July 2024 inviting written representations or a hearing request on why the claim should not be struck out, but no sufficient response was made.
The Tribunal also struck out the religion/belief discrimination complaint and the unlawful deduction of wages complaint. The reason given was that the claimant had been asked to adequately particularise those claims, but had failed to do so despite a warning that non-compliance could result in dismissal. The reasons section says those claims were struck out because of a failure to actively pursue them and a failure to comply with the Tribunal Order.
No remedy was awarded because all complaints were struck out. The judgment records only strike-out outcomes and does not contain findings on liability beyond the procedural and jurisdictional reasons for dismissal of the claims.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out because the claimant did not have the required qualifying service under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and no exemption appeared to apply. The Tribunal had written on 31 July 2024 inviting representations or a hearing request, but no sufficient representations were made. | Struck out | — | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Struck out because the claimant failed to adequately particularise the religion/belief discrimination claim despite a warning that non-compliance might result in dismissal. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Struck out because the claimant failed to adequately particularise the wages claim despite a warning, and failed to comply with the Tribunal Order / actively pursue the claim. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.108 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.