Case 2307951/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M. Wilson v Rubadubs Nursery Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2307951/2020
- Decision date
- 2 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T.R. Smith
- Venue
- London South via CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms M. Wilson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing on 2 February 2022 before Employment Judge T.R. Smith, the tribunal considered Ms M. Wilson's claim against Rubadubs Nursery Ltd. It found that her contract of employment was not terminated by frustration and that the respondent expressly terminated the contract within the meaning of section 95(1) Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal also found that the claim was presented within the period specified in section 111 Employment Rights Act 1996. The written record does not record any monetary award or a final merits decision beyond those points.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal determined that the claimant's contract was not terminated by frustration, that the respondent expressly terminated the contract within section 95(1) ERA 1996, and that the claim was presented within the section 111 time limit. The written record does not set out a final liability outcome on the merits of unfair dismissal. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.95(1) ERA 1996
- s.111 ERA 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
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.