Claimant v Bavana Partners
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim struck out because the claimant did not have two years' qualifying service as required by section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant acknowledged this requirement but failed to identify any basis on which it did not apply, such as automatic unfair dismissal.
Facts
The claimant brought a claim for unfair dismissal against Bavana Partners. The tribunal wrote to the claimant on 8 January 2024 and again on 8 January 2025 asking her to explain why her claim should not be struck out given she did not have the requisite two years' service required by section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant acknowledged the two-year requirement but asked the claim not be struck out, providing details of her dismissal. She did not identify any basis for an automatic unfair dismissal claim which would avoid the two-year requirement, and failed to respond to the second letter by the 20 January 2025 deadline.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the claim because the claimant did not have two years' qualifying service for ordinary unfair dismissal and failed to make sufficient representations or identify any automatic unfair dismissal basis that would exempt her from this requirement.
Practical note
Unrepresented claimants must have two years' continuous employment to bring ordinary unfair dismissal claims, unless they can identify a specific automatic unfair dismissal reason that does not require qualifying service.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2216735/2023
- Decision date
- 21 May 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Name
- Bavana Partners
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No