Case 1403557/2018 · Employment Tribunal

Miss I McMahon v AFS Advisers Ltd — 2018

Case reference: 1403557/2018
Decision date: 28 November 2018
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Livesey Date

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Miss I McMahon

Respondent

AFS Advisers Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal dealt only with the claimant's complaint of unfair dismissal. Employment Judge Livesey held that the complaint was struck out because section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal claim, and the claimant had been employed for less than two years.

The judgment records that the claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but no acceptable reason was provided. On that basis, the tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint.

The tribunal expressly stated that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this judgment. No monetary remedy was awarded in this decision.

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 was therefore not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 1996; the claimant did not give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity, why the complaint should not be struck out.	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

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.

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.