Case 1305264/2021 · Employment Tribunal

M N Ullah v GXO Logistics UK Limited and 1 other — 2022

Case reference: 1305264/2021
Decision date: 18 February 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Meichen

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

3 named

Claimant

M N Ullah

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal dealt only with the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint in this judgment. It held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 required the claimant to have at least two years' service in order to bring an unfair dismissal claim, and found that he had been employed for less than two years.

On that basis, the tribunal concluded that the claimant was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal complaint and struck it out. It also recorded that the claimant had been given the opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but did not provide an acceptable reason.

The judgment expressly states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision. No monetary award was made in this judgment.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint because section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service and the claimant had less than two years' service. The judgment also records that the claimant did not give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity, why the complaint should not be struck out. The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision.	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 .

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.