Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant had less than two years' service and therefore did not meet the qualifying period required under Section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to bring an unfair dismissal claim. The claimant failed to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out.
Facts
The claimant H Cadzow brought an unfair dismissal complaint against Rolton Group. The claimant had been employed for less than two years. The judgment notes that the claimant has other complaints that are not affected by this strike-out decision.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint because the claimant did not have the required two years' service under Section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out but failed to provide an acceptable reason.
Practical note
Unrepresented claimants often fail to understand the two-year qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims, and tribunals will strike out such claims on a preliminary basis when this threshold is not met.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6036083/2025
- Decision date
- 5 January 2026
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Name
- Rolton Group
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No