Mr C Riley v PC Specialist Limited — 2025

Case reference: 6006661/2024
Decision date: 25 March 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Ayre Date

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr C Riley

Respondent

PC Specialist Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal dealt only with the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint. It found that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service to bring such a complaint, and that Mr C Riley had been employed for less than two years.

Because the claimant did not meet the statutory qualifying period, the tribunal held that he was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal complaint. It also recorded that he had been given the opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but did not give an acceptable reason.

The result was that the unfair dismissal complaint was struck out. The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 required at least two years' service, which the claimant did not have. The claimant also failed to give an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out.	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.