Case 1805335/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Esteller Dura v Acorn P&D Ltd — 2018
- Case reference
- 1805335/2018
- Decision date
- 25 June 2018
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Esteller Dura
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint. It recorded that the claimant complained of unfair dismissal, but section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 required two years' service in order to bring such a complaint, and the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
The tribunal therefore found that the claimant was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal claim. It also found 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 claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision. It noted that the remaining claims would proceed as listed on 25 June 2018, with an increased time estimate of 2 hours.
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 was therefore not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.