Claimant v Clearabee Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant did not have the required two years continuous service under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. The claimant was employed for less than two years and failed to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out.
Facts
Mr Telfer was employed by Clearabee Limited for less than two years before his employment ended. He brought a complaint of unfair dismissal along with other unspecified complaints. The tribunal gave him an opportunity to explain why his unfair dismissal complaint should proceed despite lacking the qualifying service period.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint because the claimant did not have the required two years continuous employment under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant failed to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out. The claimant's other complaints were unaffected.
Practical note
Claimants must have two years continuous service to bring ordinary unfair dismissal claims, and this jurisdictional requirement is strictly applied unless the claim falls within an automatic unfair dismissal exception.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1305028/2024
- Decision date
- 4 April 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No