Cases6020132/2025

Claimant v Sysco GB Limited

24 October 2025Before Employment Judge M HallenLondon Eastremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

The claim was dismissed pursuant to Section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 because the claimant did not have the required two years' continuous service. The claimant was employed from 13 March 2023 to 6 February 2025, falling five weeks short of the qualifying period. The tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the claim.

Facts

The claimant was employed as a Warehouseman from 13 March 2023 to 6 February 2025, when he was dismissed for gross misconduct relating to misuse of a Christmas food voucher. He brought an unfair dismissal claim, arguing the dismissal was procedurally unfair and potentially motivated by avoiding him reaching two years' service. The claimant did not attend the preliminary hearing and the respondent was represented by counsel.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim for lack of jurisdiction. The claimant was five weeks short of the two years' continuous service required under section 108 ERA 1996. The claimant's allegations about the respondent's motivation and procedural fairness were irrelevant to the jurisdictional question.

Practical note

A claimant dismissed just short of two years' service has no claim for ordinary unfair dismissal regardless of the employer's motivation or procedural fairness, unless claiming automatically unfair dismissal.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.108

Case details

Case number
6020132/2025
Decision date
24 October 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
logistics
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Warehouseman
Service
2 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No