Case 1401201/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs R Burt v Wayne Solomon — 2023
- Case reference
- 1401201/2023
- Decision date
- 3 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dawson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs R Burt
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs R Burt brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Wayne Solomon. The tribunal held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 required 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 concluded that she was not entitled to bring the proceedings.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out, including by reference to any exception to section 108, but her email reply to the strike out warning on 2 June 2023 did not disclose details tending to show that an exception applied. The claim was therefore struck out.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claimant complained of unfair dismissal, but the tribunal held that she had less than two years' service and therefore was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 1996. She was given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out, but her response on 2 June 2023 did not identify any exception to section 108. | 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.