HGV driver dismissed for misconduct: no jurisdiction because service under two years
An HGV driver with just over a year's service was dismissed for misconduct. The tribunal struck out his unfair dismissal claim because he lacked the required two years' continuous service and could not identify any statutory exception.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- Claimant was employed from 1 November 2021 to 2 December 2022, a period of one year one month and one week.
- Claimant was dismissed for misconduct due to negative conduct with other staff and customers.
- Claimant did not have two years' continuous service required for unfair dismissal claim.
- Claimant could not identify any statutory exception to the two-year service requirement.
- The tribunal dismissed the claim for lack of jurisdiction.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment as an HGV driver with A R Wholesale Ltd.
-
Dismissal
Claimant was dismissed for misconduct due to negative conduct with other staff and customers. He received one week's pay in lieu of notice.
-
Notice and Order
Claimant was given opportunity to identify how his claim falls within statutory exceptions to the two-year service requirement.
-
Written submissions
Claimant provided written submissions regarding exceptions to the service requirement.
-
Full merits hearing
The tribunal heard the case. Claimant appeared in person, respondent represented by Miss Ajebade. Claimant's oral submissions did not identify an exception. Claim dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant had the two years' continuous service needed to bring an unfair dismissal claim, or whether any of the statutory exceptions to that rule applied.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim for unfair dismissal because it had no jurisdiction to hear it.
The key reason was that the claimant had only one year, one month and one week of continuous service, which is below the two-year threshold required by section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant could not show that his dismissal fell within any of the statutory exceptions that would allow a claim without two years' service (such as dismissal for a reason automatically unfair, e.g., whistleblowing or discrimination).
No compensation was awarded as the claim was struck out at the jurisdictional stage.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employees with less than two years' service generally cannot bring an unfair dismissal claim, unless the dismissal is for an automatically unfair reason such as whistleblowing or discrimination.
- If you have less than two years' service, you must identify a specific statutory exception to bring a claim – general complaints about unfair procedure are not enough.
- Check your continuous service length before issuing a tribunal claim; if you are short of two years, consider whether your dismissal falls into one of the protected categories.
- Representing yourself without legal advice can be risky if the legal basis of your claim is unclear – the tribunal may strike out the case before considering the merits.
This case shows the hard reality of the two-year service rule for unfair dismissal claims. The claimant, an HGV driver, was dismissed after just over a year for alleged misconduct. He felt the process was unfair and that the outcome was wrong. But the tribunal never got to hear the merits of his complaint because the law says you need two years' continuous service to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim.
The tribunal gave the claimant a chance to argue that his case fell within one of the exceptions – for example, if the real reason for dismissal was something automatically unfair like making a protected disclosure or asserting a statutory right. Despite written and oral submissions, he could only point to procedural failings by the employer. That is not enough to bypass the two-year rule.
What the employer did right
A R Wholesale Ltd, represented by counsel, successfully argued that the claim should be struck out for lack of jurisdiction. The employer did not need to defend the fairness of the dismissal on its merits because the legal threshold was not met.
What this means for similar claims
For anyone considering an unfair dismissal claim, the first question is always: do you have two years' continuous service? If not, you need to identify an automatically unfair reason. Common examples include dismissal for whistleblowing, for asserting a health and safety right, or for discrimination related to a protected characteristic. If none of those apply, the tribunal will not hear the case, no matter how unfair the dismissal may seem.
Similar cases
Fixed-term NHS employee unable to bring unfair dismissal claim due to insufficient service
An NHS employee on a fixed-term contract had their unfair dismissal and redundancy claims thrown out because they lacked the required continuous service. The tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the case.
Dismissed by three employers in under two years: claims fail due to lack of continuous service
A former employee who brought unfair dismissal claims against three separate employers had all claims dismissed because he had not worked for any of them for two years. The tribunal also struck out discrimination claims as out of time.
Claim dismissed after employee prioritised son's hospitalisation over tribunal deadline
A former employee's breach of contract claim against Away Resorts Limited was struck out as out of time. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for him to present the claim on time, despite his son's hospitalisation and home flooding.
Short-service employee wins unpaid wages and holiday pay claim
A former employee who worked for less than two years had their redundancy and unfair dismissal claims struck out, but won £2,691 for unauthorised wage deductions and unpaid holiday pay.