Miss C Stevens v Timperley village dental practice — 2023

Miss Stevens clarified at the hearing that her complaint was unfair dismissal, and that she was not pursuing notice pay because that had already been paid. The tribunal recorded that she had previously brought an unfair dismissal claim in case 2402919/2023, which had been struck out because she did not have the required two years' service under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

The claimant confirmed that this case was brought on the same facts and issue as the earlier claim, namely unfair treatment, but under a different box on the ET1. The tribunal held that, because she had already attempted to bring proceedings on the same grounds and did not have two years' service, she was not entitled to bring the present proceedings. It therefore found that it had no jurisdiction to determine the claim and struck it out.