Case 2303111/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Marugah (1) Ms S Qarouane (2) v Haix Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 2303111/2024
- Decision date
- 20 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leith
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Marugah (1) Ms S Qarouane (2)
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the unfair dismissal complaints brought by Mr R Marugah and Ms S Qarouane. It recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and found that both claimants had been employed for less than two years.
On that basis, the tribunal held that the claimants were not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal complaint. It also found that they had failed to give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so, why the complaint should not be struck out. The unfair dismissal complaints were therefore struck out under rule 37. The judgment states that the claimants' 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 held that both claimants had less than two years' service and were therefore not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 1996. The claim was struck out under rule 37 after the claimants did not give an acceptable reason why it should not be struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996
- rule 37
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.