Case 3305117/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Emily Burrows v Hertfordshire County Council — 2025
- Case reference
- 3305117/2024
- Decision date
- 24 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Michell
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Emily Burrows
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Michell sat alone at Cambridge on 24 January 2025 for a preliminary hearing in public. The tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear Miss Emily Burrows's unfair dismissal claim because she did not have the requisite two years' continuous service required by s.94 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal also recorded that Miss Burrows did not assert that she had made a protected disclosure, so she could not bring a claim under ss.47B or 103A ERA 1996. The claim was dismissed. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held it had no jurisdiction because the claimant did not have the requisite two years' continuous service under s.94 ERA 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The tribunal said the claimant did not assert that she made a protected disclosure, so she could not bring a claim under ss.47B or 103A ERA 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.94 ERA 1996
- ss.47B and 103A 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.