Claimant v SFB GoodOaks homecare
Outcome
Individual claims
The claim was struck out because the claimant appeared to lack the two years' continuous employment usually required to bring a claim of unfair dismissal. The claimant failed to make representations or request a hearing after being given an opportunity to do so by the tribunal on 14 August 2024.
Facts
Miss Mukahadzi brought an unfair dismissal claim against SFB GoodOaks homecare. The tribunal identified that the claimant appeared to lack the two years' continuous employment usually required for such a claim. On 14 August 2024, the tribunal wrote to the claimant giving her an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out. The claimant failed to respond or engage with the tribunal's process.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the claim because the claimant did not meet the qualifying service requirement for ordinary unfair dismissal and failed to make any representations or request a hearing when given the opportunity to do so. The claim could not proceed without the necessary two years of continuous employment.
Practical note
Unrepresented claimants who fail to respond to tribunal correspondence risk having their claims struck out, particularly where jurisdictional issues such as qualifying service are apparent.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3306008/2024
- Decision date
- 28 April 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No