Case 2301780/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Jake Cook v MAM Gruppe Limited/ MAM Info Tech Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2301780/2022
- Decision date
- 12 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McLaren Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Jake Cook
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the complaint of unfair dismissal. It recorded that, by letter dated 07 September 2022, the claimant had been given an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on whether the claim should be struck out because he did not have the qualifying two years' service under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and there were no exceptional circumstances exempting the service requirement.
The tribunal found that the claimant did not make written representations, or did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, the unfair dismissal complaint was struck out. The judgment states that the claimant's remaining claims continue.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out by judgment dated 12 September 2023 because the claimant did not have the qualifying two years' service under section 108 ERA 1996 and no exceptional circumstances exemption was identified. The claimant did not make sufficient representations or request a hearing in response to the tribunal's letter dated 07 September 2022. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.