Case 6022135/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Stewart v Style Acre — 2025
- Case reference
- 6022135/2024
- Decision date
- 4 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Stewart
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss S Stewart brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Style Acre. Employment Judge Anstis recorded that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires a claimant to have at least two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal claim.
The tribunal found that the claimant had been employed by the respondent for less than two years. On that basis, it held that she was not entitled to bring the unfair dismissal proceedings.
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 states that the claim is struck out.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claim was struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service and therefore was not entitled to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant did not give an acceptable reason, despite being given an opportunity to do so, why the complaint should not be struck out. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.