Case 2308248/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Sammarco v Hasan Jamal Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2308248/2020
- Decision date
- 21 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ferguson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Sammarco
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint only. It recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service for an unfair dismissal claim, and found that Mr T Sammarco had been employed by Hasan Jamal Ltd for less than two years.
On that basis, the tribunal held that he was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal complaint. It also found that he had failed to give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so, why the complaint should not be struck out. The complaint of unfair dismissal was therefore struck out.
The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision, and that the listed hearing would proceed to determine the complaint in respect of unpaid wages.
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 had been employed for less than two years and therefore was not entitled to bring the claim under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996
- strike out
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.