Case 1400014/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs C Lawrence v Tideford Organic Foods Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1400014/2022
- Decision date
- 14 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Roper Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs C Lawrence
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs C Lawrence brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Tideford Organic Foods Ltd. The tribunal held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years. On that basis, the tribunal decided she was not entitled to bring the complaint.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant did not give an acceptable reason, despite being given an opportunity to do so after the Tribunal's letter dated 26 January 2022, for why the complaint should not be struck out. The complaint of unfair dismissal 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 | The tribunal held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 required two years' qualifying service for an unfair dismissal complaint, found that the claimant had less than two years' service, and struck out the complaint after the claimant did not provide an acceptable reason in response to the Tribunal's letter dated 26 January 2022. The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected. | 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.