Claimant v Sir B Slade and Others — 2021

Case reference: 1403052/2020
Decision date: 29 March 2021
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Gray Dated

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Respondent

Sir B Slade and Others

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The Claimant brought complaints of unfair dismissal and redundancy payment. The tribunal recorded that sections 108 and 155 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 require at least two years' service to bring those complaints.

The tribunal noted that the Claimant had asserted she had less than two years' service. On that basis, it held that she was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal and redundancy pay complaints and that they were struck out. The reasons also stated that the Claimant's other complaints were not affected by this judgment.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The judgment line states the complaint was 'dismissed', but the reasons conclude the unfair dismissal complaint was struck out because the Claimant asserted she had less than two years' service under s.108 ERA 1996.	Struck out	—	—
Redundancy	The judgment line states the complaint was 'dismissed', but the reasons conclude the redundancy payment complaint was struck out because the Claimant asserted she had less than two years' service under s.155 ERA 1996.	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

2 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.