Miss L Smith v Midway Care Group Ltd — 2019

Case reference: 1306139/2019
Decision date: 16 October 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Woffenden

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Miss L Smith

Respondent

Midway Care Group Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Miss L Smith brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Midway Care Group. Employment Judge Woffenden recorded that the claimant had been employed for less than two years, so she did not meet the qualifying service requirement for an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

The tribunal also recorded that the claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but she did not give an acceptable reason. On that basis, the complaint of unfair dismissal was struck out. The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	Struck out because section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service for an unfair dismissal complaint, and the tribunal found the claimant had less than two years' service. The tribunal also found she did not give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity, why the complaint should not be struck out.	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 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.