Case 6016060/2024 · Employment Tribunal
C Deamer v Retail Technology Services Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6016060/2024
- Decision date
- 1 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Graham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
C Deamer
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 7 January 2025, the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the unfair dismissal complaint should not be struck out. The tribunal recorded that the complaint had no reasonable prospect of success because the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
The claimant did not make sufficient representations and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint under Rule 38(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024.
The judgment states that it does not affect the claimant's other complaints.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal struck out the complaint under Rule 38(1)(a) after giving the claimant an opportunity by letter dated 7 January 2025 to make representations or request a hearing. The reason given was that the claim had no reasonable prospect of success because the claimant had been employed for less than two years. The claimant did not make sufficient representations or request a hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 38(1)(a) Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.