Case 1307015/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss D Smith v Clear Box Premises — 2020
- Case reference
- 1307015/2019
- Decision date
- 31 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Monk Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss D Smith
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss D Smith brought an unfair dismissal complaint against Clear Box Premises. In a strike-out judgment dated 31 March 2020, Employment Judge Monk held that the complaint could not proceed because section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service and the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the unfair dismissal complaint should not be struck out, but she did not provide an acceptable reason. The unfair dismissal complaint was therefore 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 the claimant had less than two years' service, so she was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 1996. The tribunal noted that she was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but did not give an acceptable reason. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.108 ERA 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.