Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant had less than two years continuous service and therefore did not meet the qualifying period required under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant failed to provide an acceptable reason why the claim should not be struck out despite being given an opportunity to do so.
Facts
The claimant brought an unfair dismissal claim against Uber but had been employed for less than two years. The tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity until 13 January 2025 to provide an acceptable reason why the claim should not be struck out due to lack of qualifying service, but the claimant failed to do so.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant did not have the required two years continuous service under section 108 ERA 1996 and failed to provide any acceptable reason why the claim should proceed despite being given the opportunity to do so.
Practical note
Ordinary unfair dismissal claims require two years qualifying service and will be struck out at the preliminary stage if the claimant cannot meet this threshold and fails to provide grounds for proceeding.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6014879/2024
- Decision date
- 11 March 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Name
- Uber
- Sector
- technology
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No