Case 2302297/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Blackie v External Jewels Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2302297/2020
- Decision date
- 13 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tsamados Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Blackie
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint. It found that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service to bring such a claim, and that Mr L Blackie had been employed for less than two years.
On that basis, the tribunal concluded that he was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint and struck the claim out. The judgment records that the claimant acknowledged the point and said he had been unaware of the service requirement.
The tribunal expressly stated that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by the judgment. The reasons also note that he intended to pursue a claim in respect of notice pay separately.
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 less than two years' service and was therefore not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal claim under section 108 ERA 1996. The judgment notes that the claimant acknowledged this and said he was unaware of the requirement. It also records that he intended to pursue notice pay separately. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.