Case 1802974/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss B Stone v Inn Trade solutions Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1802974/2022
- Decision date
- 11 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss B Stone
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant’s unfair dismissal complaint in this judgment. It held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years’ service before an unfair dismissal complaint can be brought, and found that Miss B Stone had been employed for less than two years.
Because the statutory qualifying period was not met, the tribunal concluded that she was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal complaint. It also recorded that she had been given the opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, or to request a hearing, but had not provided an acceptable reason. The judgment states that the claimant’s other complaints were not affected by this decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal complaint was struck out because the claimant had been employed for less than two years and therefore did not meet the section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996 service requirement. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out or request a hearing, but did not give an acceptable reason. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.