Customer service advisor with 10 days' service has unfair dismissal claim struck out
A customer service advisor who was dismissed after just 10 days had his unfair dismissal claim struck out for lack of qualifying service, and his discrimination claims dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a customer service advisor from 5 January 2022 to 14 January 2022.
- The claimant did not have two years' qualifying service for an unfair dismissal claim.
- The claimant did not attend the preliminary hearing and sent emails indicating he did not wish to pursue the claim.
- The respondent alleged the claimant was dismissed due to serious concerns about his treatment of women and failure to follow management instructions.
- The tribunal found the discrimination claims had no reasonable prospect of success.
Timeline
-
Employment started
The claimant began employment as a customer service advisor.
-
Dismissal
The claimant was dismissed due to concerns about his treatment of women and failure to follow a management instruction.
-
Claimant emails tribunal
The claimant sent an email asking if he could cancel the case and making derogatory slurs.
-
Preliminary hearing and strike-out
The claimant did not attend the hearing. The tribunal struck out all claims for lack of jurisdiction and no reasonable prospect of success.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether to strike out claims for unfair dismissal (due to lack of jurisdiction) and discrimination (due to no reasonable prospect of success and failure to pursue).
The outcome
The tribunal struck out all claims. The unfair dismissal claim was struck out because the claimant had only 10 days' service, falling short of the two-year qualifying period required by section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The discrimination claims on grounds of sex and sexual orientation were struck out under rule 37(1)(a) and (d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013, as they had no reasonable prospect of success and the claimant had not actively pursued them. The claimant did not attend the hearing and sent emails indicating he wished to cancel the case.
No compensation was awarded as all claims were struck out.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employees need at least two years' continuous service to bring an unfair dismissal claim, unless the dismissal is for an automatically unfair reason.
- Discrimination claims do not require a minimum service period, but must have a reasonable prospect of success and be actively pursued.
- Failing to attend hearings or communicate with the tribunal can lead to claims being struck out for lack of active pursuit.
- Sending offensive correspondence to the tribunal or respondent can harm your case and may result in further action.
This case shows the importance of understanding the legal requirements for bringing employment claims. The claimant, a customer service advisor, was dismissed after only 10 days of employment. He brought claims for unfair dismissal and discrimination, but the tribunal struck them out before they could proceed.
The short-service trap
Under UK law, most employees need two years' continuous service to claim unfair dismissal. With just 10 days' service, the claimant could not meet this threshold. The tribunal had no choice but to strike out that claim. This is a common pitfall for workers who assume any dismissal can be challenged.
Discrimination claims require evidence
The claimant also alleged sex and sexual orientation discrimination. However, the respondent's evidence showed the dismissal was due to concerns about the claimant's treatment of women and his failure to follow a management instruction. The tribunal found no basis to suggest that a female employee in the same position would have been treated differently. The discrimination claims were struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success.
The importance of engaging with the process
The claimant did not attend the preliminary hearing. He sent emails asking if he could cancel the case and making derogatory slurs. The tribunal noted this as a failure to actively pursue the claims, providing an additional ground to strike them out.
What this means for similar cases
This case is a reminder that employment rights are not automatic. Employees should check their qualifying service before bringing an unfair dismissal claim. For discrimination claims, there must be a credible basis for the allegation. And once a claim is lodged, it must be pursued diligently — ignoring hearings or sending abusive messages can lead to strike-out without any consideration of the merits.
Similar cases
Abusive emails and swearing at judge: tribunal strikes out discrimination claims
A former employee who sent abusive emails to the tribunal and swore at the employment judge has had his discrimination claims struck out for unreasonable conduct.
Whistleblowing unfair dismissal claim struck out for no reasonable prospect of success
A contract social worker's claim that they were automatically unfairly dismissed for making protected disclosures has been struck out by the tribunal, which found it had no reasonable prospect of success.
Claims struck out after claimant failed to attend hearing and lacked service
A former employee who brought unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal and breach of contract claims had all three struck out after failing to attend a preliminary hearing and not having two years' service.
Sanctions law prevented maternity pay: dismissal claim struck out
A housekeeping assistant's unfair dismissal claim was struck out because UK sanctions on the company's owner made it illegal to pay her. The tribunal said the claim had no reasonable prospect of success.
