Case 1600045/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Owen v Oceans Edge Restaurant Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1600045/2023
- Decision date
- 24 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Brace Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Owen
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint. It held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service to bring such a complaint, and found that Miss C Owen had been employed by Oceans Edge Restaurant Limited for less than two years.
Because the statutory qualifying period was not met, the tribunal concluded that the claimant was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal complaint. It also recorded that the claimant had failed to give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so, why the complaint should not be struck out.
The judgment states that the complaint of unfair dismissal was struck out and that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 required at least two years' service for an unfair dismissal complaint. It found the claimant had been employed for less than two years and had not given an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity, why the complaint 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.