Case 1601164/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Flanigan v Monzo Bank Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1601164/2023
- Decision date
- 18 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sharp Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Flanigan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Miss S Flanigan's unfair dismissal complaint. By a letter dated 14 August 2023, it gave her an opportunity to make representations, or request a hearing, on why the complaint should not be struck out because section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 generally prevents an unfair dismissal claim unless the claimant has been employed for two years or more, subject to exceptions.
The claimant did not make written representations, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. The judgment records that the claimant's remaining claims were still listed for a preliminary hearing and a final hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | By letter dated 14 August 2023, the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on whether the unfair dismissal complaint should be struck out because of the section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996 qualifying period. The claimant did not make sufficient representations or request a hearing, so the complaint was struck out. | 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.