Cases6016923/2025

Claimant v Newbold Solicitors

17 July 2025Before Employment Judge C Sharpon papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

The claim was struck out because the claimant had less than two years 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 D Arthur was employed by Newbold Solicitors for less than two years. The claimant brought a complaint of unfair dismissal. The judgment notes that the claimant has other complaints that are not affected by this judgment.

Decision

The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint because the claimant did not have 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 complaint should not be struck out but failed to do so.

Practical note

Ordinary unfair dismissal claims require two years continuous employment, and claims without sufficient service will be struck out as lacking jurisdiction regardless of the merits.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.108

Case details

Case number
6016923/2025
Decision date
17 July 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
legal services
Represented
No

Employment details

Service
2 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No