Case 1303479/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Grant gordon v Prestbury medical practice — 2022
- Case reference
- 1303479/2021
- Decision date
- 5 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Harding Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Grant gordon
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Miss C Grant Gordon, brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Prestbury Medical Practice. The tribunal recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service before an unfair dismissal complaint can be brought. It found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years, so she was not entitled to pursue the proceedings.
The tribunal also noted that the claimant had been given the opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but did not give an acceptable reason. The judgment therefore states that the claim is struck out. The hearing listed for 11 and 12 July 2022 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal said the claimant complained of unfair dismissal, but had been employed for less than two years. It relied on section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and found the claimant was not entitled to bring the complaint. The claimant also failed to give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity, why the complaint should not be struck out. | 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.