Case 3321214/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Sarah Hurst v Department For International Trade — 2020
- Case reference
- 3321214/2019
- Decision date
- 13 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Appearances
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Sarah Hurst
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Sarah Hurst brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against the Department for International Trade. At the hearing in Reading on 13 February 2020, Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto recorded that the claimant was appearing in person and the respondent was represented by counsel. The tribunal dealt with the claim as an unfair dismissal complaint under sections 94 and 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint under rule 37(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success. The reason given was that the claimant did not have the two years' qualifying employment required by section 108(1) ERA 1996, and the exception in section 108(3) did not apply.
No liability finding or monetary remedy was awarded. The judgment contains no split of compensation, no basic award, and no compensatory award because the claim was struck out at the threshold stage.
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 under rule 37(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 because it had no reasonable prospect of success. The judgment records that the claimant did not have two years' qualifying employment under section 108(1) ERA 1996 and that section 108(3) did not apply. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- rule 37(1)(a) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- section 94 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 98 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 108(1) Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 108(3) 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.