Claimant v Jaguar Land Rover Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The claim was struck out because the claimant did not have the required two years' continuous service as mandated 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.
Facts
Mr Birdi was employed by Jaguar Land Rover Limited for less than two years. He brought a complaint of unfair dismissal along with other unspecified complaints. The tribunal considered whether the unfair dismissal claim could proceed given the service requirement.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant had less than two years' continuous service, which is 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. Other complaints were unaffected.
Practical note
Employment tribunals will strike out ordinary unfair dismissal claims where the claimant lacks the statutory two-year qualifying period, unless there are grounds for automatic unfair dismissal which do not require qualifying service.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1308966/2022
- Decision date
- 2 June 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- manufacturing
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No