Outcome
Individual claims
The claim was struck out because the claimant did not have the required two years' continuous service to bring an unfair dismissal claim under s.108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and the case did not fall within any of the statutory exceptions to this requirement.
The tribunal confirmed that the striking out of the unfair dismissal claim does not affect the claimant's continuing discrimination claim under s.39(2) of the Equality Act 2010, which has no minimum service requirement and remains to be determined.
Facts
The claimant resigned and alleged constructive dismissal linked to disability discrimination. Her unfair dismissal claim was struck out on 5 December 2024 because she lacked two years' continuous service required under s.108 ERA 1996. She applied for reconsideration on 15 December 2024, arguing that discrimination cases should not be subject to the two-year rule and that her dismissal was discriminatory under the Equality Act 2010.
Decision
The tribunal refused the reconsideration application because there was no reasonable prospect of varying or revoking the original judgment. The two-year service requirement for unfair dismissal claims applies regardless of whether discrimination is alleged. The claimant's discrimination claim under s.39(2) Equality Act 2010 remains unaffected and can proceed without a minimum service requirement.
Practical note
A claimant cannot circumvent the two-year qualifying period for unfair dismissal by linking the dismissal to discrimination, but discrimination claims themselves have no service requirement and can proceed independently.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6015422/2024
- Decision date
- 5 December 2024
- Hearing type
- reconsideration
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Name
- FearFree
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No