Case 1802628/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Atkinson v Cloud 2 Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 1802628/2020
- Decision date
- 30 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shepherd
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Atkinson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy letter dated 21 May 2020, the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the unfair dismissal complaint should not be struck out, because she was not entitled to bring that complaint if she had not been employed for two years or more. The claimant did not make written representations.
At a preliminary hearing on 22 July 2020, Ms J Atkinson confirmed that she did not have the continuous employment required to bring a complaint of unfair dismissal under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. On that basis, Employment Judge Shepherd struck out the unfair dismissal complaint.
The judgment states that the claimant's remaining claims would proceed to a final hearing. No monetary remedy was awarded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal struck out the complaint because the claimant confirmed at the preliminary hearing on 22 July 2020 that she did not have the two years' continuous employment required to bring an unfair dismissal claim under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.