Case 2409857/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Phillips-Rose v Remembrance Group Ltd (In Voluntary Liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 2409857/2022
- Decision date
- 15 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Phillips-Rose
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs S Phillips-Rose brought a claim for unfair dismissal against Remembrance Group Ltd (In Voluntary Liquidation). Employment Judge Johnson held that the claimant had been employed for less than two years and therefore did not satisfy the qualifying service requirement under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Because the statutory threshold was not met, the tribunal concluded that the claimant was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. The claimant was also given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out, but did not provide an acceptable reason. The unfair dismissal complaint was therefore struck out.
The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision, but it does not determine them.
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 was therefore not entitled to bring the claim under section 108 ERA 1996. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the claim 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.