Claimant v Zoe Jarvis
Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant had less than two years service which is required under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. The claimant failed to give an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out.
Facts
Mrs Rowland brought an unfair dismissal claim against her former employer Zoe Jarvis. The claimant had been employed for less than two years. Section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires not less than two years service to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the complaint should not be struck out but failed to provide an acceptable reason.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint because the claimant lacked the requisite two years qualifying service under section 108 ERA 1996. The claimant's other complaints remain unaffected by this judgment.
Practical note
Claimants without two years continuous service cannot bring ordinary unfair dismissal claims unless the dismissal falls within an automatically unfair category that does not require qualifying service.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6001022/2024
- Decision date
- 17 April 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Name
- Zoe Jarvis
- Sector
- —
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No