Claimant v Cheeky Charlie Ovens Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The claim was struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service and therefore did not meet the qualifying period required under s.108 Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to provide reasons why the claim should not be struck out, but the claimant failed to provide an acceptable reason.
Facts
The claimant Carol Wiggins brought a claim for unfair dismissal against her former employer Cheeky Charlie Ovens Ltd. She had been employed for less than two years. The tribunal wrote to the claimant on 3 October 2024 giving her an opportunity to explain why her unfair dismissal claim should not be struck out given her insufficient length of service.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant did not have the required two years' continuous service to bring such a claim under s.108 ERA 1996. The claimant was given an opportunity to provide reasons why the claim should not be struck out but failed to provide an acceptable reason. Other complaints brought by the claimant were not affected.
Practical note
Claimants must have at least two years' continuous service to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim, and claims lacking this jurisdictional requirement will be struck out even if the claimant is given an opportunity to explain why they should proceed.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6012107/2024
- Decision date
- 16 January 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- hospitality
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No