Case 6001090/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Sir A Stoica v Coyle Personnel Ltd and 2 others — 2025
- Case reference
- 6001090/2025
- Decision date
- 3 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge French Date
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Sir A Stoica
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Sir A Stoica, brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Coyle Personnel Ltd, CREST PLUS OPERSTIONS LTD and INSIDE LIMITED. The tribunal recorded that the complaint was struck out.
The reason given was that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and the claimant had been employed for less than two years. The tribunal also noted that the claimant had been given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but had not given an acceptable reason. The tribunal therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint and stated that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by the judgment.
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 because the claimant had less than two years' service and was therefore not entitled to bring that complaint under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.