Case 1403242/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Tveragaite v Infrastructure Delivery Services Limited (in compulsory liquidation) — 2022
- Case reference
- 1403242/2022
- Decision date
- 2 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Self Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Tveragaite
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint. It held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 required at least two years' service before an unfair dismissal complaint could be brought, and found that Miss J Tveragaite had been employed by Infrastructure Delivery Services Ltd for less than two years.
Because the claimant did not have the qualifying service required by section 108, the tribunal found that she was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal complaint. It also recorded that she had been given the opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but had not given an acceptable reason. The complaint of unfair dismissal was therefore struck out. The tribunal stated that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service and therefore was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 1996; no acceptable reason was given for why the complaint should not be struck out. | 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.