Case 6009496/2025 · Employment Tribunal
M Withey v Northwest Payments Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6009496/2025
- Decision date
- 21 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Batten
Parties
2 namedClaimant
M Withey
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard from the claimant and the respondent at Manchester by video platform on 22 July 2025 before Employment Judge Batten sitting alone. The claimant was represented in person and the respondent was represented by its director, K Riley.
The complaint of unfair dismissal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The tribunal found that the claimant did not have the two years' service required to bring an unfair dismissal claim under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The complaint of breach of contract was also dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The tribunal found that the claimant had not been employed for a month, which was required for that claim under section 86 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the claimant did not have 2 years' service required under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the claimant was not employed for a month as required by section 86 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 86 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.