Case 2601767/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Payler v The Monkey Tree Ashby Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2601767/2020
- Decision date
- 25 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ahmed Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Payler
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint. It recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires a claimant to have at least two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal claim, and found that Ms Payler had been employed by the respondent for less than two years.
Because the claimant was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and had failed to give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity, why the complaint should not be struck out, the tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. The judgment also states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this 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 section 108 ERA 1996 requires two years' service and the claimant had less than two years' service. The judgment states that 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
2 references- s.108 Employment Rights Act 1996
- strike out for lack of qualifying service
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.