Claimant v Y-Mobility Limited
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 despite being given the opportunity.
Facts
The claimant was employed by Y-Mobility Limited for less than two years. He brought a complaint of unfair dismissal. The tribunal noted that he also had other complaints pending which were not affected by this judgment. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the unfair dismissal claim should not be struck out but failed to provide an acceptable reason.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint on the basis that the claimant did not have the required two years' continuous service under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant's other complaints remain live and were not affected by this decision.
Practical note
An unfair dismissal claim cannot proceed where the claimant has less than two years' service unless it falls within one of the statutory exceptions to the qualifying period requirement.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6012011/2025
- Decision date
- 18 December 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- transport
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No