Outcome
Individual claims
The claim was struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service, which is the statutory minimum required under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. The claimant failed to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out despite being given the opportunity.
Facts
The claimant K Scott brought a complaint of unfair dismissal against Belle de vie Hampshire LTD. The claimant was employed by the respondent for less than two years. The judgment notes that the claimant had other complaints that were not affected by this decision.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant lacked the required two years' continuous service under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out but failed to provide an acceptable reason.
Practical note
This case demonstrates the strict application of the two-year qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal claims, with no jurisdiction to hear such claims where the service requirement is not met.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6017402/2025
- Decision date
- 8 September 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No