Claims struck out after former employee fails to attend hearing or comply with orders
A former employee's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims have been struck out after he failed to attend a preliminary hearing and did not comply with tribunal orders to provide evidence.
2 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed from June or July 2022 to 31 March 2023, less than two years.
- The claimant failed to provide information ordered by the tribunal regarding his disability claim.
- The claimant did not attend the preliminary hearing and made no contact with the tribunal.
- The claimant took no steps to pursue his claim after the September 2023 hearing.
- The unfair dismissal claim was struck out for lack of jurisdiction due to insufficient service length.
- The disability discrimination claim was struck out for non-compliance and failure to pursue.
Timeline
-
Employment start (claimant's evidence)
The claimant states his employment began on 5 June 2022.
-
Employment start (respondent's evidence)
The respondent states the employment began on 5 July 2022.
-
Dismissal
The claimant was dismissed on 31 March 2023.
-
Telephone preliminary hearing
Employment Judge Hutchings conducted a telephone preliminary hearing and ordered the claimant to provide information by 27 October 2023.
-
Public preliminary hearing
The hearing was held to determine disability status. The claimant did not attend and had not complied with orders.
-
Judgment issued
Employment Judge M Ord struck out both claims.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant had the required two years' continuous service to bring an unfair dismissal claim, and whether he had provided sufficient evidence to establish disability status for his discrimination claim.
The outcome
The Employment Tribunal struck out both of the former employee's claims.
- The unfair dismissal claim was struck out because the claimant had been employed for less than two years (on his own evidence, 2 days less than 10 months), so the tribunal had no legal jurisdiction to hear it.
- The disability discrimination claim was struck out for non-compliance with tribunal orders and failure to actively pursue the claim. The claimant did not provide any of the information ordered by the tribunal, did not attend the hearing, and made no contact with the tribunal to explain his absence.
No compensation was awarded as the claims were struck out.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employees must have at least two years' continuous service to bring an unfair dismissal claim, unless the dismissal is for an automatically unfair reason.
- Failing to comply with tribunal orders, such as providing medical evidence for a disability claim, can result in the claim being struck out.
- Attending all scheduled hearings and keeping the tribunal informed of any issues is essential; non-attendance without explanation can lead to dismissal of the claim.
- If you are representing yourself, it is important to actively pursue your case and respond to tribunal directions to avoid having your claim struck out.
This case shows how quickly employment tribunal claims can collapse when a claimant fails to engage with the process. The former employee brought claims for unfair dismissal and disability discrimination against Munro Leisure Investments Limited, but the tribunal struck out both claims before they could be heard on their merits.
Why the claims failed
The unfair dismissal claim had a fundamental problem from the start: the claimant had worked for the company for less than two years (between 9 and 10 months, depending on which start date was accepted). Under the Employment Rights Act 1996, employees need two years' continuous service to bring a standard unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal had no choice but to strike out that part of the claim for lack of jurisdiction.
The disability discrimination claim faced a different issue. At a preliminary hearing in September 2023, the tribunal ordered the claimant to provide specific information about his alleged disability, including medical records and details of how the impairment affected his daily activities. The claimant did not provide any of this information, did not attend the next hearing in December 2023, and made no contact with the tribunal to explain his absence. The tribunal concluded that the claim had not been actively pursued and struck it out under its procedural rules.
What the claimant could have done differently
The outcome might have been different if the claimant had engaged with the process. For the unfair dismissal claim, even with less than two years' service, he could have argued that the dismissal was for an automatically unfair reason (such as whistleblowing or asserting a statutory right), which does not require two years' service. However, he did not raise such a claim. For the disability discrimination claim, providing the requested medical evidence and attending the hearing would have allowed the tribunal to decide whether he was legally disabled and whether discrimination occurred.
What this means for similar claims
This case is a reminder that employment tribunals expect claimants to follow orders and attend hearings. Non-compliance can be fatal to a claim, regardless of its underlying merits. It also highlights the importance of understanding the service requirement for unfair dismissal claims, which is a common hurdle for employees with less than two years' service.
Similar cases
Claims struck out after claimant failed to comply with tribunal orders
A former employee's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims were struck out after they failed to attend hearings, comply with case management orders, or contact the tribunal for over six months.
Former employee's claims struck out after ignoring tribunal orders and failing to attend hearing
A former employee's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims have been struck out after he repeatedly failed to comply with case management orders and did not attend the strike-out hearing.
Claim struck out after failure to comply with tribunal orders due to ill-health
A former employee's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims against Marks and Spencer were struck out after she failed to comply with tribunal orders and did not actively pursue her claim.
Strike-out for deaf former employee who tried to add new claims late
A tribunal struck out a deaf former employee's disability discrimination claim after she failed to comply with directions and attempted to add new claims that went beyond her original ET1.