Case 6007683/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Michael Grant Beckerleg v SSS Management Services Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6007683/2024
- Decision date
- 2 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Elizabeth Gibson
- Venue
- By CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Michael Grant Beckerleg
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Michael Grant Beckerleg brought a claim of unfair dismissal against SSS Management Services Limited. The case was heard by Employment Judge Elizabeth Gibson by CVP on 11 and 12 August 2025, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by Mrs Stacey Anderson, managing director.
The tribunal held that the claimant's claim for unfair dismissal was not well founded and dismissed it. The written judgment record does not set out the tribunal's reasons, because it notes that oral reasons were given at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
No financial award is recorded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the unfair dismissal claim was 'not well founded' and was dismissed. No reasons or remedy were given in the written record; the note says reasons were given orally at the hearing and written reasons were not provided. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.