Claimant v Midd Engineering (Coventry) Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant had less than two years' continuous service and therefore did not meet the qualifying period required 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 despite being given the opportunity to do so.
Facts
Mr Oppong was employed by Midd Engineering (Coventry) Limited for less than two years. He brought a complaint of unfair dismissal along with other unspecified complaints. The tribunal noted that other complaints remained unaffected by this judgment.
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. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out but failed to provide an acceptable reason.
Practical note
Claimants must have at least two years' continuous service to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim unless one of the automatic unfair dismissal exceptions applies.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6023420/2025
- Decision date
- 22 December 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- manufacturing
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No