Case 2411377/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Fisher v Lancashire Teaching Hospital (NHS) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2411377/2023
- Decision date
- 21 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cookson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Fisher
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mrs L Fisher, brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Lancashire Teaching Hospital (NHS). The tribunal recorded that the claim was for unfair dismissal only.
The tribunal held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service before an unfair dismissal complaint can be brought. It found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
On that basis, the tribunal concluded that the claimant was not entitled to bring the proceedings. It also recorded that the claimant had been given the opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but had not given an acceptable reason.
The claim was therefore struck out. No monetary remedy was awarded or assessed in the 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 less than two years' service and had not given an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.