Case 6020754/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Hounsome v Team Industrial Services (UK) Limited HELD AT: Liverpool — 2025
- Case reference
- 6020754/2024
- Decision date
- 31 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Hounsome
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed by the respondent from 12 February 2024 until 30 July 2024. His substantive role at the Fawley site was no longer required after business difficulties affecting the respondent's work with Exxon Mobil, and the respondent treated his probation as failed before later ending a temporary arrangement.
The Tribunal considered whether the claimant had asserted a statutory right protected by section 104 Employment Rights Act 1996, including matters connected with redundancy, redeployment and reliance on the ACAS Code. It found that the matters relied on were not statutory rights protected by section 104.
The Tribunal therefore concluded that the claimant was not unfairly dismissed for the reason or principal reason that he asserted a protected statutory right. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Automatic unfair dismissal claim under section 104 Employment Rights Act 1996; the Tribunal found the claimant did not assert a statutory right protected by section 104 and was not unfairly dismissed for that reason. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 104 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.