Case 1309245/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Ali v Akaal Construction Ltd (in creditors voluntary liquidation) — 2021
- Case reference
- 1309245/2019
- Decision date
- 14 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Harding Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Ali
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered Ms Ali's unfair dismissal complaint against Akaal Construction Ltd (in creditors voluntary liquidation). It held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service for an unfair dismissal complaint and found that Ms Ali had been employed for less than two years.
On that basis, the tribunal concluded that she was not entitled to pursue the unfair dismissal claim. It also recorded that she had been given the opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out but did not give an acceptable reason, so the unfair dismissal claim was struck out. The judgment states that the remaining claim would proceed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that section 108 ERA 1996 required two years' service for an unfair dismissal claim, found the claimant had less than two years' service, and struck out the complaint after she did not give an acceptable reason why it should not be struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.