Claimant v Gileston Manor Properties Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant had less than two years continuous service and therefore did not meet the statutory qualifying period under s.108 ERA 1996 to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. The tribunal struck out the claim after giving the claimant an opportunity to provide reasons why it should not be struck out.
Facts
The claimant was employed by Gileston Manor Properties Ltd for less than two years. He brought a complaint of unfair dismissal along with other unspecified complaints. The tribunal considered whether he met the statutory qualifying period for unfair dismissal under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant did not have the required two years continuous service to bring such a complaint. The claimant was given an opportunity to provide reasons why the claim should not be struck out but failed to provide an acceptable reason. The claimant's other complaints remain unaffected.
Practical note
Claimants must have at least two years continuous service to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim unless the dismissal falls into an automatically unfair category that does not require qualifying service.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1604232/2024
- Decision date
- 7 January 2026
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- real estate
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No