Case 2305687/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Brenton v The Tender Touch Independent Funeral Services Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2305687/2023
- Decision date
- 8 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Aspinall
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Brenton
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 27 November 2023, the tribunal gave Miss C Brenton an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why her unfair dismissal complaint should not be struck out. The tribunal said the complaint could not proceed because she did not have the qualifying two years' service under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and there were no exceptional circumstances providing an exemption to that service requirement.
Miss Brenton did not make written representations, 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 them 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 showing why the claim should proceed. | 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.