BFS Group Ltd
Case Summary
The employment tribunal found that Mr Cocking, employed as General Manager by BFS Group Ltd, was dismissed after failing his probationary period. The judge ruled that while the Respondent did not provide sufficient payment in lieu of notice, the claimant's dismissal was not wrongful.
Key Issues
- •whether the decision not to pass the probationary period was rational or arbitrary
- •payment in lieu of notice
Claim Types
Cited Laws and Legal Issues
u of notice. He also claims that there was an unauthorised deduction from wages. 2. ACAS was notified under the Early Conciliat
Decision Text
Case No: 1600979/2024 10.5 Reserved judgment with reasons – rule 62 March 2017 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Simon Cocking Respondent: BFS Group Limited Heard at: Cardiff ET by video On: 20 th June 2024 Before: EJ W Brady Representation Claimant: Mr Fullagar (Solicitor) Respondent: Ms Churchhouse (Counsel) RESERVED JUDGMENT 1. The Claimant’s claim for Breach of Contract is not well-founded and is dismissed. 2. The Claimant’s claim for the unauthorised deduction of wages is not well-founded and is dismissed. REASONS Introduction: 1. The Respondent is a UK service wholesaler and distributor trading as “Bidfood”. The Claimant was employed by the Respondent as a General Manager of the Respondent’s Chepstow depot from 19 June 2023 until his dismissal on 31 December 2023. The Claimant Claims that he was wrongfully dismissed as he says he was not paid sufficient payment in lieu of notice. He also claims that there was an unauthorised deduction from wages. 2. ACAS was notified under the Early Conciliation Procedure on 14 February 2024 and the certificate was issued on 27 March 2024. Claims and Issues: Case No: 1600979/2024 10.5 Reserved judgment with reasons – rule 62 March 2017 3. The Claimant has brought claims for wrongful dismissal and unauthorised deduction of wages. The issues were agreed at the start of the hearing. 4. Breach of Contract: 4.1 What was the Claimant’s notice period 4.2 Was the claimant paid for that notice period? 4.3 If not did the Claimant do something so serious that the respondent was entitled to dismiss without notice? 5. Wages: 5.1 Did the respondent make unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages and if so how much was deducted? 5.2 Were the wages paid less than he should have been paid? 6. Both parties agreed at the outset that under the terms of the contr...
Employer
Employment Details
- Industry
- service wholesaler and distributor
- Representation
- Legally represented
Case Details
- Case Number
- 1600979/2024
- Decision Date
- 28/06/2024
- Published
- 08/07/2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- EJ W Brady