Case 6017136/2026 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Coiffait-Gunn v Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals — 2026
- Case reference
- 6017136/2026
- Decision date
- 29 May 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Byrne Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Coiffait-Gunn
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a public preliminary hearing on 29 May 2026, Employment Judge Byrne considered Mr L Coiffait-Gunn’s application for interim relief under sections 128–129 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The application related to his claim against the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals for automatic unfair dismissal contrary to section 103A ERA 1996. The Tribunal held that the interim relief application failed and dismissed it.
The judgment did not determine the substantive section 103A automatic unfair dismissal claim and made no monetary award. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written record contains no further findings or reasoning.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The Tribunal dismissed only the application for interim relief under sections 128–129 ERA 1996. It did not determine the substantive claim for automatic unfair dismissal contrary to section 103A ERA 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- sections 128–129 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 103A 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.