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.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed by three separate employers for less than two years each.
- The claimant's claim for unfair dismissal against the First and Third Respondents was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction due to insufficient service.
- The claimant's discrimination claim against the Second Respondent was dismissed as out of time.
- The claimant's claims for unpaid wages and holiday pay against the Second Respondent were initially allowed to proceed but later dismissed when the claimant failed to attend the hearing.
- The claimant had knowledge of tribunal time limits from April 2021 and had legal advice in early June 2021.
Timeline
-
Employment with First Respondent begins
Claimant started work for London Borough of Newham.
-
Dismissal by First Respondent
Claimant was dismissed for confrontational behaviour.
-
Employment with Third Respondent begins
Claimant started work for London Borough of Hillingdon.
-
Resignation from Third Respondent
Claimant resigned during a disciplinary process.
-
Employment with Second Respondent begins
Claimant started work for The Riverside Group Limited.
-
Dismissal by Second Respondent
Claimant was dismissed for poor performance.
-
Knee fracture
Claimant suffered a knee fracture, causing mobility issues.
-
ACAS contact for Second Respondent
Claimant contacted ACAS regarding claims against Second Respondent.
-
Claim presented
Claimant presented his claim form to the Employment Tribunal.
-
Preliminary hearing
Employment Judge Reid heard time limit and jurisdiction issues.
-
Final hearing
Claimant failed to attend; claims for wages and holiday pay dismissed.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant had sufficient continuous service (at least two years) to bring unfair dismissal claims, whether his discrimination claim was presented within the three-month time limit, and whether claims for unpaid wages and holiday pay were within its jurisdiction.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims against the three respondents.
- Unfair dismissal claims against all three employers were dismissed because the claimant had not been employed by any of them for two years, as required by s108(1) Employment Rights Act 1996.
- The religion or belief discrimination claim against The Riverside Group Limited was presented outside the three-month time limit, and the tribunal refused to extend time because the claimant had knowledge of the time limits from April 2021 and had legal advice in early June 2021.
- Claims for unpaid wages and holiday pay against The Riverside Group Limited were initially allowed to proceed but were later dismissed when the claimant failed to attend the final hearing.
Lessons & takeaways
- You need at least two years' continuous service with the same employer to bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim – shorter periods with different employers do not count.
- If you believe you have been discriminated against, you must bring your claim to the employment tribunal within three months of the act – even if you are dealing with other issues or injuries.
- Keep records of when you first learn about tribunal time limits and any legal advice you receive – these dates can be crucial if you later argue that it was not reasonably practicable to claim on time.
- If you are bringing claims against multiple employers, check each one separately for time limits and service requirements – they are not linked.
- Failing to attend a hearing without good reason will likely result in your claim being dismissed.
A case of multiple employers, multiple hurdles
This case shows how employment rights depend heavily on continuous service and strict time limits. The former employee had worked for three different employers over a period of about two years, but never for more than a few months with any one of them. When he brought unfair dismissal claims against all three, the tribunal had no choice but to dismiss them – the law requires two years' continuous employment with the same employer to bring such a claim.
Time limits matter even when life gets in the way
The claimant also alleged religion or belief discrimination against The Riverside Group Limited. However, he did not present that claim until September 2021, several months after his dismissal in May 2021. The tribunal found that he had known about the three-month time limit since at least April 2021, and had even sought legal advice in early June. His knee fracture in June 2021 did not justify the delay because he could have contacted ACAS or the tribunal before that. The tribunal therefore refused to extend time.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant could have acted much sooner. He was aware of the time limits from April 2021, yet waited until August to contact ACAS. If he had started the process immediately after his dismissal, the discrimination claim might have been in time. For the unfair dismissal claims, the fundamental problem was insufficient service – no amount of early action would have overcome that legal bar.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a stark reminder that employment tribunal claims are subject to strict legal requirements. Unfair dismissal requires two years' service (unless the dismissal is for an automatically unfair reason). Discrimination claims must be brought within three months. Even if you have a strong case on the facts, missing these technical requirements means the tribunal cannot hear it. Anyone considering a claim should check their service length and act promptly – ideally within weeks of the dismissal or discriminatory act.
Similar cases
Hotel manager's unfair dismissal claim dismissed as out of time despite ADHD
A tribunal dismissed a hotel manager's claims for unfair dismissal, disability discrimination and unpaid wages because they were presented over a month late. The judge found that his ADHD did not prevent him from bringing the claim on time.
Dismissed without a meeting or appeal: a conduct case with big reductions
A former employee of Fairview Grocers Limited was unfairly dismissed without any meeting or right of appeal, but his own conduct led to a 60% cut in compensation. He was awarded £3,752.89 in total.
Unfair dismissal but 100% Polkey reduction due to workplace closure
A former employee was unfairly dismissed but received only limited compensation because the tribunal found he would have been fairly dismissed a month later when the workplace closed. Total award: £12,419.29.
Independent clerk to school appeals panels was a worker, not an employee — claims out of time
A long-serving independent clerk who worked for Royal Borough of Greenwich for 28 years was found to be a worker rather than an employee, meaning her unfair dismissal claim could not proceed. Her remaining claims for holiday pay and expenses were also dismissed as too late.