Case 2600477/2019 · Employment Tribunal

Miss C Konarski v Memorabilia Framers Ltd — 2019

Case reference: 2600477/2019
Decision date: 8 July 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Hutchinson Date

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Miss C Konarski

Respondent

Memorabilia Framers Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal considered only the claimant's complaint of unfair dismissal. It held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service for an unfair dismissal complaint, and found that Miss C Konarski had been employed by Memorabilia Framers Ltd for less than two years. On that basis, the tribunal found she was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal complaint.

The tribunal also recorded that the claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but she did not give an acceptable reason. The complaint of unfair dismissal was therefore struck out. The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision.

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 judgment says the claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out but did not give an acceptable reason.	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.