Mr M Angell v ’s claims but insisting on a claim of unfair dismissal. The email stated “As he was only weeks short of years service we would wish to claim under this basis.’. 4. The and 2 others — 2022

This was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Jones on 14 October 2022. The claimant was not present and not represented. The respondent, Kwik-fit (GB) Ltd, was represented by counsel. The tribunal noted a long procedural history, including several earlier postponements sought by the claimant's mother, who had been representing him, and an earlier preliminary hearing at which the claimant was asked whether he wished to insist on an unfair dismissal claim under s.94 Employment Rights Act 1996 despite appearing to have less than two years' service.

An email dated 25 August 2022, sent on behalf of the claimant, withdrew the other aspects of the claim but maintained the unfair dismissal claim on the basis that he was only nine weeks short of two years' service. The respondent applied to strike out the claim for having no reasonable prospects of success. At the hearing, counsel for the respondent submitted that the tribunal had no jurisdiction because the claimant did not have the necessary qualifying service, and that the first date on which he could demonstrate he had worked for the respondent was consistent with his contract of employment.

The tribunal accepted that submission and held that there was no legal basis on which it had jurisdiction to consider an unfair dismissal claim where the claimant was nine weeks short of two years' service. It also recorded that the claimant had been given a reasonable opportunity to make submissions in writing and at a hearing, and that the failure of his representative to participate in the pre-hearing test had not deprived him of that opportunity. The claim was therefore struck out as of 14 October 2022.