Case 1406320/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Wall v Carnon Downs Garden Centre Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 1406320/2019
- Decision date
- 13 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Pirani
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Wall
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss J Wall brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Carnon Downs Garden Centre Ltd. The tribunal recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires a claimant to have not less than two years' service in order to bring an unfair dismissal complaint.
The tribunal found that the claimant had been employed by the respondent for less than two years. On that basis, it concluded that she was not entitled to bring the proceedings.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant had been given the opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but she did not give an acceptable reason. The whole claim was therefore struck out by Regional Employment Judge Pirani on 13 February 2020.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claimant brought an unfair dismissal complaint. The tribunal held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 required at least two years' service, found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years, and struck out the whole claim after she did not provide an acceptable reason why it 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.