Claimant v Corby Croft Coatings Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant had less than two years' continuity of service and therefore did not meet the qualifying period to bring a claim for ordinary unfair dismissal under section 94 and 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claim was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds.
The tribunal found against the claimant on the wrongful dismissal claim and dismissed it. The judgment does not provide detailed reasons as these were given orally at the hearing and no written reasons were requested.
Facts
Paul Coglan brought claims for unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal against his former employer, Corby Croft Coatings Limited. The claimant did not attend or participate in the remote video hearing. The respondent was represented by two of its directors. The tribunal determined that the claimant had less than two years' continuous employment with the respondent.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant lacked the necessary two years' qualifying service required by statute. The wrongful dismissal claim was also dismissed on its merits. The claimant received no award.
Practical note
Claimants must have at least two years' continuous employment to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim, and non-attendance at a hearing does not prevent the tribunal from proceeding and dismissing claims on their merits or jurisdictional grounds.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2500545/2025
- Decision date
- 14 August 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- manufacturing
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- in house
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No