Cases6010256/2025

Claimant v DPDgroup UK Ltd

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

The claim was struck out because the claimant did not have the requisite two years' continuous service 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.

Facts

Mr Zbieralski brought an unfair dismissal claim against DPDgroup UK Ltd and Vito Logistics Ltd. The judgment does not detail the circumstances of dismissal or clarify which respondent was his employer. The claimant had worked for less than two years for whichever respondent employed him. The judgment notes that other complaints brought by the claimant remain unaffected.

Decision

The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint because the claimant did not meet the statutory qualifying period of two years' continuous employment required 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

Ordinary unfair dismissal claims require two years' qualifying service, and claims without this will be struck out on jurisdictional grounds unless there is an automatic unfair dismissal exception.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.108

Case details

Case number
6010256/2025
Decision date
27 June 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
logistics
Represented
No

Employment details

Service
2 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No