Claimant v Stow Residential Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim struck out because the claimant did not have two years' service as required by section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996, did not comply with tribunal orders dated 6 August 2024 and 6 February 2025, and failed to attend hearings on 6 February 2025 and 30 April 2025, indicating she was not actively pursuing her claim.
Facts
Miss Nicholls brought claims including unfair dismissal against Stow Residential Limited and four individuals. She lacked the required two years' service for unfair dismissal. She failed to comply with tribunal orders dated 6 August 2024 and 6 February 2025. She did not attend preliminary hearings on 6 February 2025 and 30 April 2025 and did not apply for postponements.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the claim under rule 38 because the claimant lacked qualifying service for unfair dismissal, failed to comply with multiple tribunal orders, and failed to attend two preliminary hearings without explanation, demonstrating she was not actively pursuing her claim.
Practical note
Unrepresented claimants must comply with tribunal orders and attend hearings; failure to do so, combined with lack of qualifying service, will result in claims being struck out for non-pursuit.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6004081/2024
- Decision date
- 30 April 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- real estate
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No