Case 3323418/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Robinson v Mr Ali Alp and 1 other — 2023
- Case reference
- 3323418/2021
- Decision date
- 21 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Russell Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr J Robinson
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr J Robinson, brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Mr Ali Alp and All Round Canine Limited. The tribunal recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service for an unfair dismissal complaint.
The tribunal found that Mr Robinson had been employed for less than two years. It gave him an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but he gave no reason. The tribunal therefore held that it could not consider the unfair dismissal complaint because the qualifying period had not been met, and the complaint was struck out.
The judgment stated 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 held that the claimant had less than two years' service, so section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996 prevented consideration of the unfair dismissal complaint. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but gave no reason. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.