M Chako v Emmaculate Care Services Ltd: 6017903/2025
JUDGMENT
[1]The claimant was employed by the respondent for less than two years. The claim for ordinary unfair dismissal therefore fails and is dismissed.[2]The claim for unfair dismissal under section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 is not well founded. It fails and is dismissed.[3]The claim for unfair dismissal under section 100 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 is not well founded. It fails and is dismissed.[4]The claim for unfair dismissal under section 104 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 is not well founded. It fails and is dismissed.[5]The claim for detriment under section 48 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 is not well founded. It fails and is dismissed.[6]The wrongful dismissal claim fails and is dismissed.[7]The respondent has not failed to comply with its obligations to provide a written statement of employment particulars and of any statement of changes. 10.2 Judgment - rule 61 Case No: 6017903/2025 Approved by: 18 February