Claimant v Trinity Saint David
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim struck out because claimant did not have the required two years qualifying service to bring an unfair dismissal claim. Tribunal found no exception applied to the qualifying service requirement.
Discrimination claims were not affected by the strike out decision and remain live. This reconsideration judgment only concerned the unfair dismissal claim.
Facts
Claimant brought claims including unfair dismissal and disability discrimination against Trinity Saint David. The unfair dismissal claim was struck out on 18 November 2025 because claimant lacked two years qualifying service. Claimant applied for reconsideration on 11 December 2025, arguing mutual expectation of work provision and raising issues about discriminatory environments affecting disabled staff. Claimant also mentioned protected disclosures about procedural inconsistencies and ethical issues but these had not been pleaded in the claim form.
Decision
Tribunal refused the reconsideration application. The unfair dismissal strike out was upheld as there was no exception to the two year qualifying service requirement. The discrimination claims remained unaffected. The tribunal noted that if claimant wished to add a protected disclosure claim (which has no qualifying period), this required a formal amendment application.
Practical note
A claimant cannot circumvent the two-year qualifying service requirement for unfair dismissal by arguing mutual expectation of work or discriminatory environment; new claims such as protected disclosure detriment must be properly pleaded or added by amendment application.
Legal authorities cited
Case details
- Case number
- 2305016/2024
- Decision date
- 5 January 2026
- Hearing type
- reconsideration
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- education
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No