Case 1406187/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Sommerville v Brymor Group Southern Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1406187/2023
- Decision date
- 7 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cadney Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Sommerville
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal considered the Claimant's unfair dismissal complaint against Brymor Group Southern Limited under case number 1406187/2023. Employment Judge Cadney held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires a claimant to have not less than two years' service to present an unfair dismissal complaint.
The Claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but did not provide an acceptable reason. The tribunal therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint.
The judgment stated that the Claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision. The judgment was dated 30 January 2024 and sent to the parties on 7 February 2024.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out because section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and the Claimant did not give an acceptable reason why the claim 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.