Mr C White v Rogue Alloy Co Ltd — 2025

Case reference: 3305890/2024
Decision date: 18 February 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Anstis Date

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr C White

Respondent

Rogue Alloy Co Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Mr C White brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Rogue Alloy Co Ltd. The tribunal held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service before an unfair dismissal complaint can be brought, and found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years.

On that basis, the tribunal concluded that the claimant was not entitled to pursue the proceedings. It also recorded that the claimant had been given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but had not given an acceptable reason. The claim was therefore struck out.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint because the claimant had less than two years' service and therefore did not satisfy the statutory qualifying period in section 108 ERA 1996. The claimant was given an opportunity to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out but did not do so.	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.