Case 4109422/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs B Rulka (Deceased) v Represented by: Ms A Rulka - Daughter APL Domestic Services Limited t/a Servicemaster — 2022
- Case reference
- 4109422/2021
- Decision date
- 12 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge B Campbell
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs B Rulka (Deceased)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant worked as a cleaner for the respondent from 1 June 2018. After a leg problem in June 2019 she went off sick, received Statutory Sick Pay for 28 weeks, and remained unable to do her normal physically demanding work. In February 2020 she met Mr and Mrs Muir, who said there were no alternative duties available. Mrs Muir then wrote on 12 February 2020 saying the claimant's employment was effectively at an end, although the claimant continued to receive payslips for a time because of a payroll communication error.
The tribunal accepted that the claimant had genuinely not appreciated that her employment had ended, and it found that sending fit notes after the February 2020 meeting did not continue the employment relationship. It found on the balance of probabilities that the employment ended on 11 February 2020, meaning the claimant had not completed the two years' continuous service required by section 108(1) ERA 1996 to bring a general unfair dismissal claim.
Because the claimant lacked the necessary qualifying service, the tribunal did not go on to decide whether there was a dismissal, whether the respondent had a potentially fair reason under section 98(1) and (2) ERA 1996, or whether section 98(4) ERA 1996 was satisfied. The only claim left for determination was therefore dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The discussion section contains references to 11 February 2019 and 12 February 2019, but the factual chronology elsewhere refers to the meeting and letter of 11 and 12 February 2020. The tribunal's substantive finding was that employment ended at that February meeting/letter, so the claimant had not completed two years' continuous service. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.108(1) ERA 1996
- s.98(1) and (2) ERA 1996
- s.98(4) 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.