Cases6003274/2025

Claimant v FJ Pinnock & Son Limited

23 June 2025Before Employment Judge J BannEast Londonremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

The tribunal determined it did not have jurisdiction to consider the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant did not have the required two years' continuous service at the termination of his employment. The claim was therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Facts

The claimant brought a claim for unfair dismissal against FJ Pinnock & Son Limited. At a preliminary hearing, the tribunal considered whether it had jurisdiction to hear the claim. The respondent was represented by counsel while the claimant appeared in person. The tribunal heard that the claimant did not have the required two years' continuous service at the point his employment terminated.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim on jurisdictional grounds, finding the claimant lacked the statutory two year qualifying period of service. The tribunal also found no other claims were outstanding within its jurisdiction and dismissed the entire claim.

Practical note

Claimants must have at least two years' continuous service to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim, and lack of qualifying service will result in dismissal for want of jurisdiction at a preliminary hearing.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.108

Case details

Case number
6003274/2025
Decision date
23 June 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
other
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No