Cases6021259/2024

Claimant v H & D Air Conditioning

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

The claimant had less than two years continuous service and therefore did not meet the qualifying period required under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant failed to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out.

Facts

The claimant brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against H & D Air Conditioning. The claimant had been employed by the respondent for less than two years. The judgment notes that other complaints brought by the claimant were not affected by this strike-out.

Decision

The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint because the claimant did not have the required two years continuous service under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant was given an opportunity to provide reasons why the complaint should not be struck out but failed to give an acceptable reason.

Practical note

Unfair dismissal claims require a minimum of two years continuous service, and claims without this qualifying period will be struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.108

Case details

Case number
6021259/2024
Decision date
14 October 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
construction
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No