Case 3201438/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G King v Premier Work Support Ltd. — 2020
- Case reference
- 3201438/2020
- Decision date
- 3 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Taylor
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G King
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr G King brought a claim of unfair dismissal against Premier Work Support Ltd. Regional Employment Judge Taylor recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service before a claimant can bring an unfair dismissal complaint.
The judgment found that the claimant had been employed by the respondent for less than two years. On that basis, the tribunal held that he was not entitled to bring the proceedings. The claimant was also given an opportunity to give an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out, but did not do so.
The judgment therefore states that the unfair dismissal claim was struck out. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal struck out the claim because the claimant had been employed for less than two years and therefore was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out but did not provide an acceptable reason. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.108 ERA 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.