Cases2400083/2024

Claimant v Gavin Bailey

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

The claim was struck out because the claimant had less than 2 years' service and therefore did not meet the qualifying period required under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal complaint. The claimant was given an opportunity to provide an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out but failed to do so.

Facts

Miss Zielinska was employed by individual respondents Gavin Bailey and Mark Stott for less than two years. She brought a complaint of unfair dismissal. She was given an opportunity to explain why her claim should not be struck out but failed to provide an acceptable reason.

Decision

The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant did not have the required two years' continuous service under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and could not provide an acceptable reason why the claim should proceed despite this jurisdictional bar.

Practical note

Ordinary unfair dismissal claims require at least two years' continuous employment, and a claim lacking this qualifying service will be struck out unless there is an acceptable reason to proceed, such as an automatically unfair dismissal exception.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.108

Case details

Case number
2400083/2024
Decision date
14 March 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
Represented
No

Employment details

Service
2 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No