Case 1403816/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms C Norris v Cornwall Animal Hospital Charity — 2022
- Case reference
- 1403816/2021
- Decision date
- 7 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dawson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms C Norris
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs C Norris complained of unfair dismissal against Cornwall Animal Hospital Charity. The tribunal held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires a claimant to have at least two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
On that basis, the tribunal decided that she was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal complaint. It also recorded that, despite being given the opportunity to do so, the claimant did not give an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out. The unfair dismissal complaint was therefore struck out. The judgment stated that the claimant's other complaints were not affected.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the claimant had less than two years' service, so she was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. She was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but gave no acceptable reason. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.108 Employment Rights Act 1996
- strike out
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.