Cases6004184/2025

Claimant v Home Telecom Ltd

30 September 2025Before Employment Judge LeithScotlandon papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

The claimant had less than two years continuous service as required by section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant failed to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out despite being given the opportunity to do so.

Facts

The claimant Muhammad Uz Zaman was employed by Home Telecom Ltd for less than two years before his dismissal. He brought a claim for unfair dismissal. The tribunal struck out the claim on the basis that he did not meet the statutory qualifying period.

Decision

The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant had less than 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 claim should not be struck out but failed to do so.

Practical note

Unfair dismissal claims require two years continuous service unless the dismissal is automatically unfair, and claims lacking this qualifying period will be struck out.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.108

Case details

Case number
6004184/2025
Decision date
30 September 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
telecoms
Represented
No

Employment details

Service
2 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No