Case 2411476/2021 · Employment Tribunal
B Vaughan v 3P Logistics Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2411476/2021
- Decision date
- 25 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Batten Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
B Vaughan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against 3P Logistics Limited. Employment Judge Batten held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 required the claimant to have at least two years' service in order to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and 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 complaint.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant had failed to give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so, why the complaint should not be struck out. The unfair dismissal complaint was therefore struck out. The judgment states that the claimant's other complaint was not affected by this decision and would proceed to a hearing on 29 September 2022.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 required two years' service and found the claimant had less than two years' service. The claimant did not provide an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity, why the complaint should not be struck out. | 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.