Case 2404705/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Knights v Gleesonhomes — 2022
- Case reference
- 2404705/2022
- Decision date
- 11 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dunlop Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Knights
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr C Knights, brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Gleesonhomes. Employment Judge Dunlop recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires not less than two years' service before a claimant can bring an unfair dismissal complaint.
The tribunal found that Mr Knights had been employed by the respondent for less than two years. On that basis, it held that he was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out, but did not give an acceptable reason.
The tribunal therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision, and no remedy was awarded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal complaint was struck out under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 because the claimant had less than two years' service. The claimant did not provide an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity, why the complaint should not be struck out. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.