Cases2303323/2024

Claimant v Veterinary Medicines Directorate

31 October 2025Before Employment Judge D WrightLondon Southon papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

The claimant had less than two years' service and therefore did not meet the qualifying period required under s.108 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 was employed by the Veterinary Medicines Directorate for less than two years before being dismissed. The claimant brought a complaint of unfair dismissal along with other unspecified complaints. The judgment notes that the claimant had other complaints pending that were not affected by this strike-out decision.

Decision

The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant did not have the required two years' continuous service under s.108 ERA 1996. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out but failed to provide an acceptable reason. The claimant's other complaints remain live.

Practical note

Ordinary unfair dismissal claims require two years' qualifying service, and claims brought without this qualification will be struck out unless there is an exception such as automatically unfair dismissal.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.108

Case details

Case number
2303323/2024
Decision date
31 October 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
public sector
Represented
No

Employment details

Service
2 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No