Case 1806490/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Syrett v Bells Home Care Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 1806490/2023
- Decision date
- 9 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bright Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Syrett
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the unfair dismissal complaint in this judgment. It found that Miss S Syrett had been employed by Bells Home Care Ltd for less than two years, and that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 therefore prevented her from bringing an unfair dismissal complaint.
Applying rule 37, the tribunal recorded that the claimant had been given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but she did not give an acceptable reason. The judgment therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint.
The tribunal stated that the claimant’s other complaints were not affected by this judgment, and that the remaining claims were still listed for hearing on 5 August 2024.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint because section 108 ERA 1996 requires two years' service and the claimant had less than two years' service. The tribunal also noted that the claimant did not give an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.