Mr G Ciudatu v Genting Casino — 2024

Case reference: 2402056/2024
Decision date: 2 July 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Batten Date

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr G Ciudatu

Respondent

Genting Casino

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimant complained that he was unfairly dismissed. The Tribunal recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires a claimant to have not less than two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal complaint.

The Tribunal found that the claimant had been employed by the respondent for less than two years and was therefore not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal complaint. It also recorded that the claimant had not given an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity, why the complaint should not be struck out. The unfair dismissal complaint was struck out, and the judgment stated that the claimant's other complaints were not affected.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The unfair dismissal complaint was struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service and did not give an acceptable reason why it should not be struck out. The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints are not affected.	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.