Case 2604041/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Cotteral v Norman Birkett-Park — 2021
- Case reference
- 2604041/2020
- Decision date
- 27 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Victoria Butler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Cotteral
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss J Cotteral's complaint of unfair dismissal was struck out. Employment Judge Victoria Butler held 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, and that the claimant had been employed by the respondent for less than two years.
The tribunal recorded that the claimant was given the opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but did not give an acceptable reason. The judgment states that the unfair dismissal complaint was therefore struck out, and 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 held that the claimant had less than two years' service and was therefore not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The judgment says the claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but no acceptable reason was provided. The judgment also states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision. | 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.