Case 1309315/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Griffiths v Advance Health Care UK Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 1309315/2020
- Decision date
- 29 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gaskell
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Griffiths
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint. It held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service to bring such a complaint, and found that Miss Griffiths had been employed for less than two years.
Because the claimant was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and because she did not give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so, why the complaint should not be struck out, the tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim.
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 | 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 claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out but did not provide an acceptable reason. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.