Case 1400276/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Debnam v Doors and windows — 2022
- Case reference
- 1400276/2022
- Decision date
- 6 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Roper
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Debnam
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss S Debnam brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Doors and Windows. Employment Judge Roper held that the claim could not proceed because section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service for an unfair dismissal complaint and the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
The tribunal also found that, after being given an opportunity to explain by letter dated 04 April 2022, the claimant did not provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out. The unfair dismissal complaint was therefore struck out.
The judgment records that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision. No monetary award was made in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the claimant had less than two years' service, so she was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 1996. It also found she did not give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so after the Tribunal's letter dated 04 April 2022, why the complaint 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.