Case 3206006/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Prajapati v KGDK Restaurants Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 3206006/2022
- Decision date
- 13 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Russell Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Prajapati
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that Mr S Prajapati complained of unfair dismissal against KGDK Restaurants Limited. It held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires a claimant to have at least two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal complaint.
The tribunal found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years. On that basis, it concluded that he was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal complaint. It also recorded that the claimant had been given the opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but did not give an acceptable reason.
Accordingly, the complaint of unfair dismissal was struck out. The judgment stated 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 | The complaint was struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service and therefore could not bring an unfair dismissal complaint under s.108 ERA 1996. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out but did not give an acceptable reason. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.