Case 2401152/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr W O’Carroll v Will Nixon Construction Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2401152/2020
- Decision date
- 15 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Parkin Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr W O’Carroll
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint against Will Nixon Construction Group. It held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires a claimant to have at least two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and found that Mr W O'Carroll had been employed for less than two years.
Because the service requirement was not met, the tribunal concluded that the claimant was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal complaint. It also recorded that the claimant had been given an opportunity to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out, but had not done so. The unfair dismissal complaint was therefore struck out, and 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 struck out the unfair dismissal complaint because section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service, and the claimant had less than two years' service. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out but did not give an acceptable reason. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.108 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.