Back to search
8000219/2024unknown

User Testing Ltd and others

4 November 2024ScotlandEmployment Judge J G d’Inverno
GOV.UK

Case Summary

Employment Judge J G d’Inverno refused Ms Sandra Messi’s Application for Interim Relief, stating that it was premature to consider the sufficiency of evidence justifying the respondent's decision to dismiss her.

Key Issues

  • Application for Interim Relief in terms of sections 128 and 129 of the ERA

Claim Types

Cited Laws and Legal Issues

Employment Rights Act 1996 unfair dismissalEmployment Rights Act 1996

of founding upon for the purposes of her complaint of automatic unfair dismissal in terms of section 103A of the Employment Rights Act

Protected disclosures / whistleblowingEmployment Rights Act 1996

ployee UK Guidebook and reporting this as 15 per whistleblowing policy and their own policy in which HR and CEO docum

Decision Text

ETZ4(WR) IN THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL (SCOTLAND) AT EDINBURGH 5 Judgment of the Employment Tribunal in Application for Interim Relief in Case No: 8000219/2024, Following Interim Relief Hearing Held at Edinburgh on the 19 th of March 2024 10 Employment Judge J G d’Inverno Ms Sandra Messi Claimant 15 In Person User Testing Limited Respondent 20 Represented by: Mr Salter of Counsel instructed by Mr James England, Solicitor JUDGMENT OF THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL 25 The Judgment of the Employment Tribunal is that the claimant’s Application for Interim Relief is refused. ______________________ 30 Employment Judge 28 March 2024 ______________________ Date of Judgment 35 Date sent to parties ______________________ I confirm that this is my Judgment in the case of Messi v User Testing 40 Limited and that I have signed the Judgment by electronic signature. J d'Inverno 8000219/2024 Page 2 REASONS 1. This case called for Interim Relief Hearing on the Cloud Based Video Platform at 10 am on the 19 th of March 2024. The Hearing, which had initially been set down to proceed In Person at Edinburgh, was converted to a remote 5 CVP Hearing on the Application of the claimant. 2. The claimant appeared on her own behalf. The Respondent Company was represented by Mr Salter of Counsel. 10 3. Parties had each lodged with the Tribunal and mutually exchange a skeleton submission and a list of case authorities, to be referred to at the Hearing. In addition, the Tribunal had before it; the claimant’s ET1, a skeleton Grounds of Resistance on behalf of the respondent (...

Download full PDF

Employer

Respondent

User Testing Ltd and others

Employer page →View all cases →

Employment Details

Industry
Technology
Representation
Litigant in person

Case Details

Case Number
8000219/2024
Decision Date
04/11/2024
Published
21/11/2024
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judge
Employment Judge J G d’Inverno