Case 6013763/2025 · Employment Tribunal

Mr. F. Kubes v Department for Work and Pensions RECORD OF A PUBLIC PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2025

Case reference: 6013763/2025
Decision date: 16 December 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge J. Galbraith-Marten Appearances

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr. F. Kubes

Respondent

Department for Work and Pensions RECORD OF A PUBLIC PRELIMINARY HEARING

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a public preliminary hearing before Employment Judge J. Galbraith-Marten, the tribunal refused the claimant's application to amend his claim to include a wrongful dismissal complaint.

The tribunal found that the claimant did not have the two years' continuous service required to bring an unfair dismissal claim under s.108 Employment Rights Act 1996. It struck out that claim, and the sex discrimination claim, as having no reasonable prospect of success under Rule 38(1)(a) Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024, and dismissed them.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Wrongful dismissal	The tribunal refused the claimant's application to amend his claim to include a wrongful dismissal complaint; the complaint was not otherwise adjudicated.	Other	—	—
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal found the claimant did not have the two years' continuous service required under s.108 Employment Rights Act 1996 and struck out and dismissed the claim as having no reasonable prospect of success.	Struck out	—	—
Sex discrimination	The tribunal struck out and dismissed the sex discrimination claim as having no reasonable prospect of success.	Struck out	Sex	—

Legal tests applied

2 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.