Cases6028560/2025

Claimant v Mitie Limited

6 October 2025Before Employment Judge L Brownon papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

The claim was struck out because the claimant had less than two years' continuous service, which is the minimum qualifying period required under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal complaint. The claimant failed to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out.

Facts

The claimant, Mr Z Shagoo, brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against his former employer, Mitie Limited. He had been employed by the respondent for less than two years. The claimant was given an opportunity until 29 August 2025 to provide an acceptable reason why his complaint should not be struck out, but failed to do so.

Decision

Employment Judge Brown struck out the claim on the basis that the claimant did not have the necessary two years' continuous service required under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal complaint. The claimant failed to provide any acceptable reason why the complaint should proceed.

Practical note

Ordinary unfair dismissal claims require two years' qualifying service, and claims lacking this jurisdictional requirement will be struck out unless the claimant can demonstrate an exception applies, such as an automatically unfair reason for dismissal.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.108

Case details

Case number
6028560/2025
Decision date
6 October 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
professional services
Represented
No

Employment details

Service
2 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No