Case 3305250/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Obierefu v The Aurora Group — 2025
- Case reference
- 3305250/2024
- Decision date
- 4 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tynan Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Obierefu
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint in this judgment. It found that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service before a claimant can bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and that Miss C Obierefu had been employed by The Aurora Group for less than two years.
Because the claimant was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, the tribunal gave her an opportunity by letter dated 27 August 2024 to make representations or request a hearing on why the complaint should not be struck out. The claimant did not make representations in writing, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing.
The tribunal therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. It recorded that the claimant's remaining claim(s) stayed listed for hearing on 22 May 2025. No monetary remedy was awarded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that section 108 ERA 1996 required at least two years' service. The claimant had less than two years' service and did not make sufficient representations after being given the opportunity by letter dated 27 August 2024. | 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.