Less than two years' service: unfair dismissal claim struck out, costs order for leaving hearing
A former employee who worked for less than two years had his unfair dismissal claim struck out for lack of jurisdiction. His separate claim for unpaid wages was dismissed as unfounded, and he was ordered to pay £1,000 in costs after leaving the hearing early.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed by the respondent for less than two years.
- The claimant complained of unfair dismissal and unauthorised deductions from wages.
- The unfair dismissal complaint was struck out for lack of jurisdiction due to insufficient service.
- The unauthorised deductions claim was dismissed as not well founded.
- The claimant failed to provide full bank statements despite a tribunal order.
- The claimant left the hearing and did not return, leading to a costs order of £1000.
Timeline
-
Claimant worked week ending 27 March 2022
Claimant performed work for the respondent during this week.
-
Claimant worked week ending 3 April 2022
Claimant performed work for the respondent during this week.
-
Respondent made payment of £411.32
Respondent paid £411.32 net for 46 hours from week ending 3 April 2022.
-
Respondent made payment of £654.49
Respondent paid £654.49 net for 68 hours from weeks ending 27 March and 10 April 2022.
-
Employment Judge Holmes ordered disclosure
Judge Holmes directed the claimant to provide official bank statements for April 2022.
-
Claimant emailed incomplete screenshots
Claimant forwarded previous screenshots instead of complying with the order.
-
Final hearing
The claimant left the hearing and did not return; the case proceeded in his absence.
-
Judgment dismissing unauthorised deductions claim
The tribunal dismissed the claim as not well founded.
-
Costs order made
Tribunal ordered claimant to pay £1000 towards respondent's costs.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant had sufficient service (at least two years) to bring an unfair dismissal claim, and whether the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint for lack of jurisdiction because the claimant had been employed for less than two years, as required by section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The unauthorised deductions claim was dismissed as not well founded. The respondent provided evidence of two BACS payments totalling £1,065.81 for the hours worked, and the claimant failed to provide full bank statements to prove non-receipt, despite a tribunal order.
The claimant left the hearing and did not return, leading to a costs order of £1,000 for unreasonable conduct.
Lessons & takeaways
- You need at least two years' continuous service to bring an unfair dismissal claim in most cases.
- If you claim you were not paid, you must provide clear evidence such as full bank statements – incomplete screenshots may not be enough.
- Leaving a hearing without permission can result in a costs order against you, even if you are a litigant in person.
- Complying with tribunal orders for disclosure is essential; failure to do so can harm your case and lead to adverse findings.
This case shows how strict the two-year service requirement is for unfair dismissal claims. The former employee had worked for People Solutions Resourcing Limited for less than two years, so his unfair dismissal complaint was automatically struck out. There was no discretion for the tribunal to consider the merits.
The claimant also argued that he had not been paid for work in late March and early April 2022. However, the respondent produced bank records showing two payments made on 11 and 12 April 2022, totalling over £1,000. The tribunal noted that the claimant had not provided complete bank statements to prove he never received the money, despite being ordered to do so. The screenshots he supplied were incomplete and did not cover the relevant dates properly.
During the final hearing, the claimant left the video hearing and did not return. The tribunal proceeded in his absence and dismissed the claim. Because the claimant had failed to comply with a disclosure order and had behaved unreasonably by leaving, the tribunal ordered him to pay £1,000 towards the respondent's legal costs.
For anyone considering a similar claim, this case highlights the importance of checking the service requirement before bringing an unfair dismissal claim. It also shows that tribunals expect parties to follow orders and to provide clear, complete evidence. Leaving a hearing without good reason can lead to a costs order, even for litigants in person.
Similar cases
Claim struck out after claimant stopped engaging with tribunal and employer
A former employee who submitted an unfair dismissal claim and then cut all contact has had his case struck out and been ordered to pay £723.80 in costs.
Unfair dismissal claim struck out due to less than two years' service
A former employee of Gatwick Construction Limited had their unfair dismissal claim thrown out because they had not worked there for two years. Their other claims for wrongful dismissal and unauthorised deductions also failed.
Unfair dismissal claim struck out: employee had less than two years' service
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim against Real Coffee Bag Company Limited was struck out because she had not worked there long enough. The tribunal also dismissed her other claims after she failed to attend the hearing.
Former employee's unfair dismissal claim struck out for non-compliance, ordered to pay costs
A former employee who failed to comply with tribunal orders and did not pursue her unfair dismissal claim had it struck out. She was later ordered to pay £1,374.80 in preparation time costs.