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. Additionally, the tribunal found that the claimant was not employed by the respondent. The claimant failed to give an acceptable reason why the complaint should not be struck out.
Facts
The claimant brought an unfair dismissal complaint against ALD Facades Limited. The tribunal found that the claimant had less than two years' service with the respondent, falling short of the statutory requirement under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Additionally, the tribunal determined that the claimant was not actually employed by the respondent. 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 on two grounds: the claimant lacked the required two years' continuous service under section 108 ERA 1996, and the claimant was not actually employed by the respondent. The judgment notes that the claimant's other complaints remain unaffected by this decision.
Practical note
An unfair dismissal claim will be struck out where the claimant lacks the statutory two-year qualifying period, and a tribunal may also strike out on jurisdictional grounds where there is no employment relationship with the named respondent.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6013227/2024
- Decision date
- 11 February 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- construction
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No