Case 1400795/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Brown v Rogers Wholesale Foods — 2021
- Case reference
- 1400795/2021
- Decision date
- 6 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Roper Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Brown
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr A Brown, brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Rogers Wholesale Foods. Employment Judge Roper recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal complaint.
The tribunal found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years. It also found that he had not given an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so after the Tribunal's letter dated 24 February 2021, as to why the complaint should not be struck out.
On that basis, the complaint of unfair dismissal was 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 section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service for an unfair dismissal complaint; the claimant had less than two years' service and did not give an acceptable reason, despite being invited to do so after the Tribunal's letter dated 24 February 2021. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.