Claimant v Rohan Designs Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal did not have jurisdiction to consider the claim as the claimant had less than two years' continuous service, contrary to s.108 Employment Rights Act 1996. The statutory qualifying period for unfair dismissal was not met.
The tribunal did not have jurisdiction as the complaint was brought outside the three-month time limit prescribed by s.123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010. The tribunal declined to extend time on just and equitable grounds, finding no basis to do so.
Facts
Mrs Pilworth brought claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination against Rohan Designs Limited. She had been employed for less than two years and brought her discrimination claims outside the statutory three-month time limit. The case proceeded to a preliminary hearing on jurisdiction heard remotely via CVP.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed both claims for lack of jurisdiction. The unfair dismissal claim failed because the claimant had less than two years' continuous service as required by s.108 ERA 1996. The disability discrimination claims were dismissed as out of time under s.123(1)(b) EqA 2010, with the tribunal declining to extend time on just and equitable grounds.
Practical note
Claimants must have at least two years' continuous service to bring unfair dismissal claims, and disability discrimination claims must be brought within three months unless the tribunal finds it just and equitable to extend time.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3305115/2024
- Decision date
- 17 January 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- retail
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No