Case 2405130/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Uren v Suttons Tankers Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2405130/2022
- Decision date
- 21 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Holmes Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Uren
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint in this judgment. It found that Mr J Uren had been employed by Suttons Tankers Ltd for less than two years, and therefore did not satisfy the service requirement in section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 for bringing an unfair dismissal complaint. The tribunal recorded that the claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but no acceptable reason was provided. The judgment therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. The tribunal also stated that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this judgment.
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 section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service for such a complaint. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out but did not provide 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.