Claimant v Hednesford Town Football Club
Outcome
Individual claims
The claim was struck out because the claimant had less than two years' continuous service and did not fall within any exception to the qualifying service requirement under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant failed to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out.
Facts
Daniel Brayson brought an unfair dismissal claim against Hednesford Town Football Club. He was employed for less than two years. The tribunal gave him the opportunity to explain why his claim should not be struck out for lack of qualifying service, but he failed to provide an acceptable reason. The judgment notes that the claimant has other complaints that are not affected by this strike-out.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant did not have the required two years' continuous service under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and did not fall within any exception to this requirement. The claimant's other complaints remain live.
Practical note
Claimants must have at least two years' continuous employment to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim unless they fall within specific statutory exceptions such as automatically unfair dismissal reasons.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6020081/2025
- Decision date
- 23 December 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No