Case 1403128/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Victoria Wilson v Timeplan Education Group Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 1403128/2025
- Decision date
- 10 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dawson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Victoria Wilson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that Victoria Wilson complained of unfair dismissal against TimePlan Education. It applied section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, which it stated requires a claimant to have not less than two years' service to make an unfair dismissal complaint.
The tribunal found that the claimant was employed by the respondent for less than two years and was therefore not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. It also recorded that, despite being given the opportunity to do so, the claimant failed to give an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out. The unfair dismissal complaint was struck out, with the claimant's other complaints expressly stated to be unaffected by this judgment. No remedy was awarded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The complaint was struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996; the judgment states that other complaints were not affected. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.