Cases6027208/2025

Claimant v Cinch Cars

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 section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. The claimant failed to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out.

Facts

The claimant, Maya Williams Briscoe, brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against her former employer Cinch Cars. She was employed for less than two years. The judgment notes that the claimant has other complaints which are not affected by this strike-out.

Decision

The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim 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 was given the opportunity to provide reasons why the claim should not be struck out but failed to do so.

Practical note

Unfair dismissal claims require two years' qualifying service unless the dismissal falls within an automatically unfair category; claims lacking the qualifying period will be struck out at a preliminary stage.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.108

Case details

Case number
6027208/2025
Decision date
30 October 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
retail
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No