Case 6023542/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Storom v Plumm — 2025
- Case reference
- 6023542/2025
- Decision date
- 9 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Webster Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Storom
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr M Storom, brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Plumm. Employment Judge Webster held that the complaint could not proceed because section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires at least two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal claim, and the claimant had been employed for less than two years.
The judgment records that the claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out, but he did not give an acceptable reason. The tribunal therefore struck out the unfair dismissal complaint. The judgment also 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 | 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 ERA 1996. The judgment states the claimant's other complaints were not affected by this decision. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.108 ERA 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.