Claimant v London Borough of Newham
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant did not have the requisite 2 years' continuous service as an employee required to bring such a claim under the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The breach of contract claim was dismissed as it was brought outside the time limit prescribed by the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994, and the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have brought the claim within time.
Facts
Mr Din brought claims for unfair dismissal and breach of contract against London Borough of Newham. This was a preliminary hearing to determine whether the claims could proceed. The claimant appeared in person while the respondent was represented by a solicitor.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed both claims at the preliminary hearing stage. The unfair dismissal claim failed because the claimant did not have 2 years' continuous service. The breach of contract claim was dismissed as out of time, with the tribunal finding it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have brought it within the prescribed time limit.
Practical note
Claimants must meet the 2-year qualifying period for ordinary unfair dismissal claims and must comply strictly with time limits for breach of contract claims, especially where it was reasonably practicable to present the claim in time.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6006985/2025
- Decision date
- 5 August 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- London Borough of Newham
- Sector
- local government
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No