Case 6025160/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. R. Clark v Medics UK North limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6025160/2025
- Decision date
- 19 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T.R. Smith
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. R. Clark
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal wrote to the claimant on 19 November 2025 warning that it was considering striking out the claim because it appeared to have no reasonable prospect of success under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out or to request a hearing, but did not reply to the issue of jurisdiction.
Employment Judge T.R. Smith was satisfied that the Rule 38 grounds applied and that strike-out was in accordance with the overriding objective in Rule 3. The Tribunal found it lacked jurisdiction because the claimant did not have two years' continuous service at the effective date of termination, so the claim was struck out and the listed hearing was vacated.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claim was struck out because the Tribunal found it lacked jurisdiction as the claimant did not have two years' continuous service at the effective date of termination. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- Rule 3 overriding objective
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.