Case 3311597/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Congerton v SIKA Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3311597/2020
- Decision date
- 13 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Congerton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr L Congerton, brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Sika. The tribunal held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 required at least two years' service before an unfair dismissal complaint could be brought.
It found that Mr Congerton had been employed for less than two years, so he was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal complaint. The tribunal also recorded that he had been given the opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but he did not give an acceptable reason.
Accordingly, the tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. 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 | The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint because the claimant had less than two years' service and was therefore not entitled to bring the claim under section 108 ERA 1996. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.