Case 2406533/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Edwards v Seqirus UK Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2406533/2022
- Decision date
- 6 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Horne
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Edwards
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. It found that Mr J Edwards had not been continuously employed for two years ending with the effective date of termination, so section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 placed a limit on his right to bring an unfair dismissal claim. The judgment records that none of the statutory exceptions in section 108 appeared to apply.
Before striking out the claim, the tribunal issued a letter dated 1 November 2022 giving the claimant until 16 November 2022 to show cause why the unfair dismissal complaint should not be struck out. The claimant did not reply and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.
The judgment also states that the remainder of the claim was not struck out at that stage, but a separate strike-out warning had been sent because it appeared the rest of the claim was not being actively pursued. No final determination or remedy is recorded for the remainder of the claim in 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 not been continuously employed for two years ending with the effective date of termination, so section 108 ERA 1996 appeared to bar the claim. The claimant did not respond to the tribunal's 1 November 2022 show-cause letter by the 16 November 2022 deadline and did not request a hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.108 Employment Rights Act 1996
- rule 37 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
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.