Claimant v The 40 Four Group
Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant did not have the required two years continuous service under s.108 ERA 1996 to bring an unfair dismissal claim. The claimant failed to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out despite being given the opportunity to do so.
Facts
The claimant brought an unfair dismissal complaint against The 40 Four Group. The claimant was employed by the respondent for less than two years. The judgment notes that the claimant had other complaints which were not affected by this strike-out decision.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant did not have the required two years continuous service under s.108 ERA 1996. The claimant was given an opportunity to provide reasons why the claim should not be struck out but failed to provide acceptable reasons.
Practical note
Unfair dismissal claims require two years continuous service under s.108 ERA 1996, and this jurisdictional threshold will result in strike-out where not met, regardless of the merits of the underlying complaint.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2305702/2023
- Decision date
- 21 March 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No