Case 2407444/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Williams v Your Pets Pals Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 2407444/2024
- Decision date
- 27 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Barker Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Williams
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant’s claim for a redundancy payment. It recorded that Ms A Williams had been employed by Your Pets Pals Ltd for less than two years.
Applying section 155 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the tribunal said employees do not have the right to a redundancy payment unless they have been employed for two years or more. On that basis, it found the claimant did not have the right to a redundancy payment.
The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out, but the tribunal found that she had not given an acceptable reason. The redundancy payment claim was therefore struck out. The judgment states that the claimant’s other complaints were not affected by this decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal struck out the redundancy payment claim because the claimant had been employed for less than two years and the judgment said she did not give an acceptable reason why the claim should not be struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.155 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.