Case 2600729/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss D Salt v Jumpin Derbyshire Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2600729/2020
- Decision date
- 6 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Clark Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss D Salt
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss D Salt brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Jumpin Derbyshire Ltd. Employment Judge Clark recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service before an unfair dismissal complaint can be brought, and found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
Because the claimant lacked the required qualifying service, the tribunal held that she was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal complaint. The judgment also records that she was given an opportunity to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out, but did not do so. 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 complaint was struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service, so section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 meant she was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. 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.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.