Case 2402339/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr JK Farhan v Guarding Solutions and Training Services Ltd (t/a GSTS) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2402339/2024
- Decision date
- 3 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Eeley
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr JK Farhan
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr JK Farhan brought a single complaint of unfair dismissal against Guarding Solutions and Training Services Ltd (t/a GSTS). The case was heard by Employment Judge Eeley sitting alone at Manchester by CVP on 30 August 2024.
The tribunal held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 required two years' service for an unfair dismissal complaint, and found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years. It therefore found that he was not entitled to bring the proceedings.
The judgment records that the claimant was given an opportunity to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out, but failed to do so. The claim was accordingly struck out, and no monetary remedy was awarded.
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 the claimant had less than two years' service and therefore could not bring the claim under section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.