Outcome
Individual claims
The claim was struck out because the claimant did not have the requisite two years' continuous service to bring an unfair dismissal complaint under s.108 Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant was employed for less than two years and none of the exceptions to the two-year qualifying period applied. Despite being given the opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out, the claimant failed to provide adequate reasons.
Facts
William Worsley was employed by Tysers for less than two years before being dismissed. He brought a claim for unfair dismissal. The tribunal sent a strike-out warning on 7 August 2025, ordering the claimant to provide written reasons by 21 August 2025 as to why the claim should not be struck out. The claimant responded on 8 August 2025 stating only that he 'was dismissed without due process'.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint on the basis that the claimant did not have the required two years' continuous employment to bring such a claim under s.108 ERA 1996. The claimant failed to provide adequate reasons why the claim should not be struck out, despite being given the opportunity to do so.
Practical note
Unrepresented claimants who lack the two-year qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal claims will have their claims struck out even where they assert unfair process, unless they can identify an automatic unfair dismissal exception.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6028094/2025
- Decision date
- 28 September 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Name
- Tysers
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No