Case 2303839/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v RBS Group and National Westminster Bank plc — 2024
- Case reference
- 2303839/2024
- Decision date
- 9 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fredericks-Bowyer Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that the claimant, Miss N Carr-Thompson, had been warned that her complaint might be struck out and did not respond to that warning letter. The tribunal then struck out her unfair dismissal complaint.
The reason given was that she did not have 2 years' service, which the tribunal said was required by s.108 Employment Rights Act 1996. No compensation or other monetary remedy was awarded because the claim was struck out.
The judgment also states that the rest of the claimant's claims were unaffected by this decision, but it does not determine those claims in this judgment.
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 after the claimant did not respond to the warning letter. It stated that she did not have 2 years' service as required by s.108 Employment Rights Act 1996. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 4 PDF on gov.uk
Published on gov.uk under the .
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.