Case 6007608/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Belmes v Dominic Care Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 6007608/2024
- Decision date
- 14 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Belmes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint. It noted that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal claim unless a specific exception applies.
The claim form implied that Mr Belmes had been employed for less than two years. Although he was given an opportunity to argue that an exception applied, he did not present an argument with any reasonable prospects of success. On that basis, the unfair dismissal complaint was struck out.
The judgment states that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision, and that separate orders had been sent for those complaints to be decided at a final hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal said section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service for an unfair dismissal complaint unless an exception applies. The claim form implied the claimant had less than two years' service, and the claimant did not present any exception with reasonable prospects of success. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.