Claimant v Sweetmile Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant had less than two years' service and therefore did not meet the qualifying service requirement under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant was given an opportunity to make representations as to why the claim should not be struck out but failed to provide an acceptable reason.
Facts
Mr McLoughlin was employed by Sweetmile Limited for less than two years. He brought a claim for unfair dismissal. The tribunal wrote to him on 22 March 2024 giving him an opportunity to make representations as to why his claim should not be struck out for lack of qualifying service. The claimant failed to provide an acceptable reason.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant did not have the requisite two years' continuous service required under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant was given an opportunity to explain why the claim should proceed but did not provide an acceptable reason.
Practical note
Unfair dismissal claims require two years' qualifying service unless they fall within specific exceptions such as automatically unfair reasons.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2304855/2022
- Decision date
- 4 February 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No