Case 1600005/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Dean v Prysmian Cables & Systems Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1600005/2023
- Decision date
- 8 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brace Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Dean
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr M Dean brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Prysmian Cables and Systems. The tribunal held 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 Mr Dean had been employed for less than two years.
On that basis, the tribunal concluded that he was not entitled to bring the proceedings. It also recorded that he had been given the opportunity to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out, but did not do so. The claim was therefore struck out.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint because the claimant had been employed for less than two years and therefore did not meet the qualifying service requirement under section 108 ERA 1996. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out but did not provide an acceptable reason. | 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.