Case 6010514/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss G Carli v Entertainment Security Solutions — 2025
- Case reference
- 6010514/2024
- Decision date
- 13 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Webster Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss G Carli
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss G Carli brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Entertainment Security Solutions. Employment Judge Webster held that the complaint had to be struck out because section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service before an unfair dismissal complaint can be brought, and the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had failed to provide an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so, why the complaint should not be struck out. The judgment records 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 found the claimant had less than two years' service and therefore was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. It also recorded that, despite being given the opportunity, the claimant did not give an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out. The tribunal stated that the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this judgment. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.