Case 4105194/2023 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4105194/2023 Ms M Kennedy v We Buy Any Car Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 4105194/2023
- Decision date
- 23 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge P O'Donnell Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4105194/2023 Ms M Kennedy
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claimant's unfair dismissal claim under s.94 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 under rule 37(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. It held that the claimant did not have the two years' service normally required to bring an unfair dismissal claim under s.108(1) ERA 1996, and that the ET1 did not on its face plead any form of automatic unfair dismissal for which the service requirement would be disapplied.
The tribunal had raised the point of its own motion at a case management hearing on 25 October 2023 and gave the claimant an opportunity to object. The claimant responded by email, but her correspondence did not address the service issue or explain any basis on which the tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the claim. The tribunal therefore found that the claim had no reasonable prospect of success and struck it out. It recorded that the remaining claims for holiday pay and sex discrimination were not affected by the decision and remained live.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under rule 37(1)(a) on the basis that the claimant did not have two years' service and the ET1 did not plead automatic unfair dismissal. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 37(1)(a) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- s.94 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.108(1) 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.