Case 2401588/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss K Sutch v Peak Technology Solutions — 2022
- Case reference
- 2401588/2022
- Decision date
- 27 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leach
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss K Sutch
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss K Sutch brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Peak Technology Solutions. The tribunal recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service for an unfair dismissal complaint, and found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
On that basis, the tribunal held that the claimant was not entitled to bring the proceedings. It also noted that the claimant had been given the opportunity to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out, but had failed to do so. The judgment was therefore that the claim be struck out.
The decision was made by Employment Judge Leach on 23 June 2022 and sent to the parties on 27 June 2022.
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 she was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 1996. She 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- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.