Case 6017718/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Rander v Nationwide Renewables Limited AT A PUBLIC PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2025
- Case reference
- 6017718/2024
- Decision date
- 4 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster Appearances
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Rander
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a public preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Lancaster at Leeds by CVP. The claimant was represented by Mr Tony Ellis and the respondent by Mr Christian Ocloo of Peninsula Business Services. The only claim expressly dealt with in the judgment was unfair dismissal.
By consent, the tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because it had no jurisdiction to hear the claim where the claimant did not have two years' qualifying service. The judgment does not record any merits findings on the dismissal itself and does not record any monetary award.
The decision is limited to jurisdiction and case disposal at the preliminary stage. No legal test was set out in the short written judgment, and no other claims were determined in the text provided.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | At a public preliminary hearing, the unfair dismissal claim was struck out by consent because the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it where the claimant did not have two years' qualifying service. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.