Claimant v John W. Laycock Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found it had no jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal complaint because Alan Stankevitch was employed for less than two years and therefore did not meet the qualifying service requirement under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claim was struck out accordingly.
Facts
This was an unfair dismissal claim brought by Mrs D McLoughlin as personal representative of the estate of Alan Stankevitch, who was deceased. Mr Stankevitch had been employed by John W. Laycock Limited for a period of less than two years. The case was heard in private by video at Sheffield.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim on jurisdictional grounds, finding that Mr Stankevitch did not meet the qualifying service requirement of two years under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the complaint.
Practical note
Unfair dismissal claims require two years' continuous service under ERA 1996 s.108, and this requirement applies even where a claim is brought by a personal representative on behalf of a deceased employee's estate.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1806119/2024
- Decision date
- 5 November 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No