Case 3202550/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Mahmood v Mr Neam Aslam and 1 other — 2022
- Case reference
- 3202550/2021
- Decision date
- 21 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Jones
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms A Mahmood
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint in this judgment. Employment Judge Jones held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 required at least two years' service for an unfair dismissal claim, and found that Ms Mahmood had been employed for less than two years. On that basis, the tribunal held that she was not entitled to bring the complaint.
The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but did not give an acceptable reason. The complaint of unfair dismissal was therefore struck out against both respondents, Mr Neam Aslam and Al Futuwwa Education Ltd t/a Lady Aisha School. 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 against both respondents because the claimant had less than two years' service and therefore was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 ERA 1996; she also 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.