Case 2405429/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Doran v Unique Solutions Central Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2405429/2020
- Decision date
- 3 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Batten
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Doran
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr D Doran, brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Unique Solutions Central Limited. The tribunal held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant had been given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but had failed to give an acceptable reason. It noted that the claimant's letter dated 28 May 2020 did not show that any exception to the two-year service requirement applied.
Accordingly, the unfair dismissal complaint was struck out. The tribunal 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 | Struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service and did not give an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out; the tribunal said the section 108 ERA 1996 exception did not appear to apply. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.