Case 2415359/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss IR Hutchinson v Kandi Tree — 2021
- Case reference
- 2415359/2020
- Decision date
- 19 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss IR Hutchinson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Miss Hutchinson's claim for a statutory redundancy payment. It found that section 155 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service in order to qualify for such a payment, and that she had been employed by Kandi Tree for less than two years.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but did not provide an acceptable reason. On that basis, the redundancy payment claim was struck out.
The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints, including her unfair dismissal claim, 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 statutory redundancy payment claim because section 155 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires not less than two years' service, and the claimant had been employed for less than two years. The claimant did not give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity, why the complaint 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.