Case 3200340/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Vaughan v Bronze Age Art Foundry Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 3200340/2023
- Decision date
- 31 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Burgher
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Vaughan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint. It held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal claim, and found that Mr Vaughan had been employed by Bronze Age Art Foundry Ltd for less than two years.
Because the statutory qualifying period was not met, the tribunal decided that the claimant was not entitled to bring the complaint. It also recorded that he had been given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out, but had not provided an acceptable reason.
The judgment therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. It stated 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 | Struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service and therefore could not bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 1996. The judgment also recorded that the claimant did not 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.