Case 6003864/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Chris Ellis Project Service Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 6003864/2024
- Decision date
- 31 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fowell Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with the claimant's unfair dismissal claim in this judgment. It recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service before an unfair dismissal claim can normally be brought, subject to exceptions which did not appear to apply. On the dates given on the claim form, the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
The tribunal said it had written to the claimant to ask whether there was any reason the unfair dismissal claim should be allowed to continue despite the short service. The claimant did not respond. In those circumstances, the tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim.
The judgment also notes that the claimant's remaining breach of contract claim in relation to notice pay and annual leave was to proceed to a later hearing. No remedy was assessed in this 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 claim because the claimant appeared to have less than two years' service and had not provided any reason why the claim should be allowed to proceed. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.