Case 2303438/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Murphy v Tamesis Dock Ltd (Company No. 06555743) and 4 others — 2022
- Case reference
- 2303438/2021
- Decision date
- 28 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin Date
Parties
6 namedClaimant
Mr A Murphy
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 25 August 2021, the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on why the unfair dismissal complaint should not be struck out. The stated basis was that the claimant did not have the qualifying two years' service under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and there were no exceptional circumstances identified to exempt the claim from that qualifying period.
The claimant did not make representations in writing, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. The judgment records that the claimant's remaining claims continue, but it does not determine those claims in this decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out because the claimant did not have the qualifying two years' service under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and did not make sufficient representations or request a hearing in response to the Tribunal's letter dated 25 August 2021. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.