Case 2410291/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Abuseif v Falalfel Manchester Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2410291/2019
- Decision date
- 2 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leach Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Abuseif
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered only the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint in this judgment. It found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years, so section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 meant he was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal claim.
The tribunal office wrote to the claimant on 27 August 2019 asking for reasons why the claim should not be struck out, but the claimant did not respond. On that basis, the tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint.
The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision, and refers those complaints to the tribunal's letter dated 25 October 2019.
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 therefore was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 1996. The claimant did not respond to the tribunal office's letter dated 27 August 2019 asking for reasons why the claim should not be struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.108 ERA 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.