Case 2602582/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Kisikan-Hulett v Annie's Burger Shack Derby Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2602582/2019
- Decision date
- 25 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heap Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A Kisikan-Hulett
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint in this judgment. Employment Judge Heap held that the complaint was struck out because section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' qualifying service, and the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
The judgment records 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 tribunal therefore concluded that she was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint and struck it 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 | Struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service, so she was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 1996; she also failed to give an acceptable reason 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.