Case 2401940/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L Wareing v Briercliffe day nursery — 2025
- Case reference
- 2401940/2025
- Decision date
- 28 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leach Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss L Wareing
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss L Wareing brought a claim to the right to a redundancy payment against Briercliffe day nursery. The tribunal recorded that section 155 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 only gives employees the right to a redundancy payment if they have been employed for two years or more, and found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
On that basis, the tribunal held that the claimant did not have the right to a redundancy payment. It also recorded that the claimant was given the opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but no acceptable reason was provided. The claim was therefore struck out.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal held that section 155 Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' employment for redundancy pay, and found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but no acceptable reason was provided. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.155 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.