Case 6011083/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Fyffe v Thistle Lodge Specialist Care Services — 2024
- Case reference
- 6011083/2024
- Decision date
- 21 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Victoria Butler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Fyffe
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr S Fyffe brought a claim of unfair dismissal against Thistle Lodge Specialist Care Services. Employment Judge Victoria Butler held that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 required two years' service for an unfair dismissal complaint, and found that the claimant had been employed for less than two years. On that basis, the tribunal concluded that he was not entitled to bring the proceedings.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant was given the opportunity to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out, but failed to do so. The judgment therefore struck out the unfair dismissal claim. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the claimant had less than two years' service, so he was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. He did not give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity, why the complaint should not be struck out. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.