Cleaner's unfair dismissal and race discrimination claims struck out for non-compliance
A cleaner with less than two years' service had her unfair dismissal claim struck out, and her race discrimination claims were later struck out for failing to comply with tribunal orders and not actively pursuing the case.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed from 22 February 2019 to 26 March 2020 as a cleaner.
- The claimant alleged unfair dismissal and race discrimination.
- The claimant withdrew her breach of contract claim after receiving notice pay.
- The unfair dismissal claim was struck out because the claimant had less than two years' service.
- The race discrimination claims were not struck out at the preliminary hearing but were later struck out for non-compliance and lack of active pursuit.
- The final judgment on 3 October 2022 struck out all remaining claims.
Timeline
-
Employment started
The claimant began working for the respondent as a cleaner.
-
Work at client site ended
The claimant's work at a client site was ended. She contends she was dismissed on this date.
-
Letter to respondent
A letter was written on behalf of the claimant stating she had been dismissed.
-
ACAS Early Conciliation started
ACAS Early Conciliation began.
-
ACAS Early Conciliation ended
ACAS Early Conciliation ended.
-
Claim entered at Tribunal
The claimant entered her claim at the Employment Tribunal.
-
First preliminary hearing
A preliminary hearing was held, and orders were made for the claimant to provide particulars and a schedule of loss.
-
Strike out application
The respondent applied to strike out the claims.
-
Second preliminary hearing
Employment Judge Phil Allen heard the strike out application. The unfair dismissal claim was struck out; race discrimination claims were not struck out.
-
Final strike out judgment
Employment Judge Cookson struck out the remaining claims for non-compliance with orders and lack of active pursuit.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether to strike out the claimant's claims for having no reasonable prospect of success, non-compliance with orders, or not being actively pursued.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out all remaining claims. The unfair dismissal claim was struck out because the claimant had less than two years' continuous service, which is a legal requirement for bringing such a claim. The race discrimination claims were struck out later because the claimant failed to comply with tribunal orders (e.g., providing particulars and a schedule of loss) and did not actively pursue the case.
No compensation was awarded as the claims were dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employees with less than two years' service generally cannot bring unfair dismissal claims, unless the dismissal is for an automatically unfair reason.
- Failing to comply with tribunal orders, such as providing details of your claim or a schedule of loss, can lead to your case being struck out.
- Tribunals expect claimants to actively pursue their cases; delays or lack of communication can result in dismissal.
- If you have a limited understanding of English, seek professional advice or an interpreter to help you comply with tribunal procedures.
This case shows how procedural requirements can derail a claim, even if the underlying allegations might have merit. The claimant, a cleaner employed for just over a year, alleged she was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against because of her race. However, the tribunal never reached the substance of her complaints.
Why the claims failed
The unfair dismissal claim was struck out at an early stage because the claimant had less than two years' continuous service. This is a fundamental legal hurdle: most employees need two years' service to bring an unfair dismissal claim. The race discrimination claims survived that initial challenge but were later struck out because the claimant did not follow the tribunal's orders. She failed to provide a clear statement of her case or a schedule of loss, and she did not actively pursue the proceedings.
The tribunal noted that the claimant had the assistance of a lay representative (her daughter) and an interpreter, but still did not comply with the orders. The respondent, Sentrex Services UK Ltd, applied to strike out the claims, and the tribunal agreed that the lack of compliance and active pursuit justified striking out the remaining claims.
What this means for similar claims
This case is a reminder that employment tribunals have strict procedural rules. Claimants must provide the required information on time and keep the tribunal informed of their intentions. If you have less than two years' service, you cannot claim ordinary unfair dismissal, but you may still have other claims such as discrimination or automatically unfair dismissal. However, even strong claims can be lost if you do not comply with tribunal directions. Seeking legal advice early and following orders carefully is essential to avoid your case being struck out.
Similar cases
Server's unfair dismissal claim struck out after failing to engage with tribunal
A restaurant server with less than two years' service had his unfair dismissal claim struck out after he failed to attend hearings or comply with tribunal orders. The tribunal also dismissed his race discrimination claim due to unreasonable conduct.
Former employee loses unfair dismissal and discrimination claims after failing to pursue them
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed for lack of continuity of employment, and his race discrimination claim was thrown out as out of time. Other claims were struck out for failing to actively pursue them.
Employer's failure to comply with tribunal orders leads to strike out and £15,000 award
A local authority employee was awarded £15,483 after her employer's response was struck out for failing to comply with case management orders, leaving the tribunal unable to hold a fair hearing.
Ground operations lead loses unfair dismissal claim after failing to comply with tribunal orders
A ground operations lead's claims for unfair dismissal and race discrimination against British Airways were struck out after he repeatedly failed to comply with case management orders and did not attend the preliminary hearing.