Mr Sayd Shah v The Scottish Ministers — 2022

The tribunal considered, of its own motion, whether to strike out the claimant's unfair dismissal claim. Two jurisdictional issues had been identified: the claimant appeared not to have two years' continuous service as required by s108 ERA, and the respondent asserted there was no direct contract between the claimant and the respondent because his services were supplied by a third party.

The claimant did not dispute that he had less than two years' service and had not pleaded automatic unfair dismissal. He also accepted that there was no contract of any kind between him and the respondent. The tribunal took account of the need for caution when striking out a claim, especially where the claimant was a party litigant, but found that the issues were fundamental and would inevitably be determined against him.

The tribunal concluded that it had no jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal claim and that the claim had no prospects of success. It struck out only the unfair dismissal claim under the Employment Rights Act 1996, expressly stating that the claimant's Equality Act discrimination claims were unaffected and remained live.