Case 6004233/2024 · Employment Tribunal
C Welham v Paul Smith Ltd. — 2024
- Case reference
- 6004233/2024
- Decision date
- 18 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge E Burns Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
C Welham
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, C Welham, brought a single complaint of unfair dismissal against Paul Smith Ltd. The tribunal recorded that the claim was for unfair dismissal and that the case was listed for hearing on 11 and 12 November 2024.
The tribunal held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 required the claimant to have at least two years' service in order to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. It found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years and was therefore not entitled to bring the proceedings.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but did not give an acceptable reason. The judgment therefore struck out the unfair dismissal claim, and the listed hearing did not take place.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that section 108 ERA 1996 required at least two years' service for an unfair dismissal complaint, found the claimant had less than two years' service, and struck out the claim after the claimant did not give an acceptable reason why it should continue. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.