Case 2301853/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Khazaei v Amazing Grace ST Thomas Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 2301853/2024
- Decision date
- 22 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Curtis Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Khazaei
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant's complaint of unfair dismissal. It found that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service before an unfair dismissal complaint can be brought, and that Mr Khazaei had been employed by Amazing Grace ST Thomas Ltd for less than two years.
Because the claimant was not entitled to bring the complaint, and did not provide an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so, for why it should not be struck out, the tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. 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 tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint because the claimant had been employed for less than two years, so section 108 ERA 1996 prevented the claim, and the claimant did not give an acceptable reason why it should not be struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.108 ERA 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.