Case 6001990/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Jonathan Ure v Home EcoEarner Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 6001990/2025
- Decision date
- 19 August 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Jonathan Ure
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningJonathan Ure's complaint that Home EcoEarner Limited unfairly dismissed him was struck out. The claim form implied that he had been employed by the respondent for less than two years. Despite being given the opportunity, he did not argue that he had at least two years' service, that a specific exception applied, or that there was any other reason not to strike out the complaint. Employment Judge Quill found that strike-out was proportionate under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The judgment did not affect the claimant's other complaints. The respondent remained required to submit a defence to the complaints that the claimant was a worker and that wages properly payable were unpaid and/or that there was a breach of contract. No remedy was awarded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The strike-out applied only to the unfair dismissal complaint. The claimant's other complaints were not affected by this judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 two-year qualifying service requirement
- proportionality of strike-out
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.