Case 1403703/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Ettienne v Devon county Council and 3 others — 2023
- Case reference
- 1403703/2022
- Decision date
- 26 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Livesey Date
Parties
5 namedClaimant
Ms A Ettienne
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant’s unfair dismissal complaint. It recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years’ service before a claimant can bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and found that Ms Ettienne had been employed for less than two years.
Because that statutory requirement was not met, the tribunal found that she was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal complaint. It also noted that she had been given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but had not given an acceptable reason.
The tribunal therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. It 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 was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 1996. | 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.