Case 2203868/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M Garbera v Appesttat Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2203868/2019
- Decision date
- 5 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge E Burns
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M Garbera
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint. It recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal claim, and relied on the claimant's own claim form showing employment from 21 October 2018 to 4 April 2019.
On that basis, the tribunal found that the claimant was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. It also noted that the claimant had been given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but no acceptable reason was provided.
The unfair dismissal complaint was therefore struck out. 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 | Struck out under section 108 ERA 1996 because the claimant's stated period of employment, from 21 October 2018 to 4 April 2019, was less than two years. The tribunal noted that no acceptable reason was given why the complaint should not be struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.108 Employment Rights Act 1996
- strike out for lack of qualifying service
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.