Case 2305015/2021 · Employment Tribunal

Ms S Spencer v London & Quadrant — 2022

Case reference: 2305015/2021
Decision date: 11 January 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Wright

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms S Spencer

Respondent

London & Quadrant

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

By a letter dated 13 October 2021, the tribunal gave Ms S Spencer an opportunity to make representations, or to request a hearing, on why her unfair dismissal complaint should not be struck out. The tribunal identified the issue as whether she had the qualifying two years' service under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, or any exceptional circumstances that would exempt her from that requirement.

Ms Spencer did not make representations in writing, did not make any sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. In those circumstances, the tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. The judgment states that the claimant's remaining claims continue and that notice of hearing would be sent in due course.

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 did not have the qualifying two years' service under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and had not shown any exceptional circumstances exempting the qualifying period. The claimant did not make representations in writing or request a hearing in response to the strike-out warning.	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.