Case 1303011/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs D Osborne v GenderGP PTE Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1303011/2022
- Decision date
- 5 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Broughton Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs D Osborne
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant’s unfair dismissal complaint. It recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires a claimant to have not less than two years’ service in order to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and found that Mrs D Osborne had been employed by GenderGP PTE Ltd for less than two years.
On that basis, the tribunal held that she was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal claim. It also noted that she had been given the opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but had not given an acceptable reason. The judgment therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint and stated that the claimant’s other complaints were not affected by the decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996 required at least two years' service for an unfair dismissal complaint, and found the claimant had been employed for less than two years. It therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.108 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.