Case 2400013/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs E Hall v The Crafty Baa Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2400013/2024
- Decision date
- 22 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs E Hall
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs E Hall brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against The Crafty Baa Ltd. Employment Judge Phil Allen held that the claim could not proceed because section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant did not provide an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so, why the complaint should not be struck out. The judgment therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. The tribunal stated that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the claimant had less than two years' service, so section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 meant she was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. She did not give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity, why the complaint should not be struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.