Case 2602670/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Heath v Merch CMT Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2602670/2020
- Decision date
- 4 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Jeram Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Heath
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr J Heath brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Merch CMT Ltd. The tribunal recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires a claimant to have at least two years' service in order to bring an unfair dismissal complaint.
The tribunal found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years. On that basis, it held that he was not entitled to bring the proceedings. The judgment does not record any substantive determination of fairness of dismissal, only that the statutory qualifying service requirement was not met.
The tribunal also noted that the claimant had been given the opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but he did not give an acceptable reason. The claim was therefore struck out in full.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal said the claimant complained of unfair dismissal, but the claim was struck out because section 108 ERA 1996 requires two years' service and the claimant had less than two years' service. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.108 Employment Rights Act 1996
- strike out
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.