Claimant v St James' Hotel Trading (Stratford) Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The claim was struck out because the Claimant did not have the two years continuous employment required by section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to bring an unfair dismissal claim.
Facts
Ms E Silva brought an unfair dismissal claim against St James' Hotel Trading (Stratford) Limited. The tribunal considered the claim on the papers without a hearing. The key issue was whether the Claimant had sufficient qualifying service to bring the claim.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the Claimant did not have the two years continuous employment required by section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. This is a qualifying requirement for ordinary unfair dismissal claims.
Practical note
Claimants must have at least two years continuous employment to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim, unless the dismissal falls into one of the automatically unfair categories which do not require qualifying service.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6010920/2025
- Decision date
- 17 October 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- hospitality
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No