Case 2303034/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Portuese v St Mary's University Twickenham London — 2020
- Case reference
- 2303034/2020
- Decision date
- 17 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Khalil Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Portuese
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr A Portuese brought a claim of unfair dismissal against St Mary's University Twickenham London. The tribunal noted that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service before an unfair dismissal complaint can be brought, and found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
Because the claimant did not satisfy the qualifying service requirement, the tribunal held that he was not entitled to bring the proceedings. The tribunal also recorded that the claimant had been given an opportunity by letter dated 19 October 2020 to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but he did not give an acceptable reason. The whole claim was therefore struck out by Employment Judge Khalil Date on 17 November 2020.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal struck out the whole unfair dismissal claim because the claimant had less than two years' service and therefore was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 1996. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.