Reid v Anthony Eastwood T/A Charles E... [2008] NIIT 1659_07IT (09 July 2008)

Reid v Anthony Eastwood T/A Charles E... [2008] NIIT 1659_07IT (09 July 2008)

The claimant did not have the requisite period of continuous employment to qualify for a redundancy payment, as there was a break in service and the final period of employment was less than one year.

Citation
[2008] NIIT 1659_07IT
Parties
Claimant: Darren Reid; First Respondent: Anthony Eastwood T/A Charles Eastwood & Sons; Second Respondent: Department for Employment & Learning
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
09 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Employment Tribunal / Final Decision
Outcome
claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Redundancy Payment, Continuous Employment, Employment Breaks
Employment Law Redundancy Payment Continuous Employment Employment Breaks

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Darren Reid

Claimant

Anthony Eastwood T/A Charles Eastwood & Sons

First Respondent

Department for Employment & Learning

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Tribunal / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment based on continuous employment

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant did not have the requisite period of continuous employment to qualify for a redundancy payment, as there was a break in service and the final period of employment was less than one year.

Court Disposition

claim dismissed