Case 1601841/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs K Jones v Steven Mills and 1 other — 2022
- Case reference
- 1601841/2021
- Decision date
- 11 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sharp Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mrs K Jones
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant's complaint that she was unfairly dismissed. It recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and found that Mrs K Jones had been employed for less than two years.
On that basis, the tribunal held that she was not entitled to bring the complaint. It also found that she had not given an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so, why the complaint should not be struck out. The unfair dismissal complaint was therefore struck out. The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected, but it does not identify those complaints or decide them in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the claimant had less than two years' service and therefore was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 1996. The judgment also says the claimant did not give an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out. It states that the claimant's other complaints are not affected, but does not identify them. | 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.