Case 4103790/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Moore House School Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 4103790/2020
- Decision date
- 25 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge J Young Karen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant presented complaints of unfair dismissal and discriminatory treatment on the grounds of sex and disability. The respondent admitted dismissal but denied that it was unfair or discriminatory. The tribunal noted that the claimant had said she had continuous employment with the respondent between 1 April 2019 and 29 June 2020, so on the face of it she lacked the qualifying service needed for an unfair dismissal claim.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held the unfair dismissal claim had no reasonable prospect of success because the claimant lacked the two years' qualifying service required by s108 Employment Rights Act 1996. | Struck out | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | By the hearing the claimant said she wished to withdraw her discrimination claims and was not proceeding with them; the tribunal struck out the sex discrimination claim under Rule 37(a). | Struck out | Sex | — |
| Disability discrimination | By the hearing the claimant said she wished to withdraw her discrimination claims and was not proceeding with them; the tribunal struck out the disability discrimination claim under Rule 37(a). | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 37(a) of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- s108 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.