Case 3311623/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Ezeani v SW Global Resourcing Ltd. — 2024
- Case reference
- 3311623/2023
- Decision date
- 20 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tynan Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Ezeani
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr J Ezeani, brought complaints of unfair dismissal and failure to provide a written statement on particulars of employment against SW Global Resourcing Ltd. The tribunal stated at the outset that the claim was struck out.
The reasons record that sections 108(1) and 92(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 require 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, so he was not entitled to bring the proceedings.
The tribunal also noted that the claimant had failed to give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so, why the complaint should not be struck out. On that basis, the claim was struck out in its entirety. No monetary remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held the claimant had less than two years' service and therefore was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under s.108(1) ERA 1996. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | The judgment records a complaint of failure to provide a written statement on particulars of employment, but it does not separately analyse that complaint before striking out the claim as a whole. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.108(1) ERA 1996
- s.92(3) 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.