Unfair dismissal claim struck out: employee with less than two years' service failed to comply with orders
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim was struck out because he had less than two years' service, and his remaining claims were dismissed after he failed to attend the hearing or comply with case management orders.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Key facts
- The claimant was employed for less than two years.
- The claimant's unfair dismissal claim was struck out due to lack of jurisdiction.
- The claimant failed to comply with case management orders.
- The claimant requested a postponement the day before the hearing due to his grandmother's terminal illness.
- The respondent had prepared for the hearing and the tribunal had allocated resources.
Timeline
-
Notice of hearing sent
The claimant and respondent were given notice of the hearing on 4 January 2023.
-
Unfair dismissal claim struck out
Employment Judge Maidment struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant had less than two years' service.
-
Postponement request
The claimant emailed the tribunal requesting the hearing be stopped due to his grandmother's terminal illness.
-
Hearing and dismissal
The claimant did not attend the hearing. Employment Judge Davies dismissed the remaining claims due to the claimant's failure to attend and non-compliance with orders.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether to strike out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant lacked the required two years' continuous service, and whether to dismiss the remaining claims due to the claimant's failure to attend the hearing and comply with orders.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant had less than two years' service, meaning he had no legal right to bring such a claim. The remaining claims (e.g., holiday pay) were dismissed because the claimant did not attend the hearing, had not complied with case management orders, and had not provided a good reason for postponement.
No compensation was awarded as the claims were struck out/dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employees with less than two years' continuous service generally cannot claim unfair dismissal, unless the dismissal is for an automatically unfair reason.
- Failing to comply with tribunal orders (e.g., providing evidence or a witness statement) can lead to your claim being dismissed.
- Requesting a postponement at the last minute, especially when the other side has already prepared, is unlikely to be granted unless there is a very strong reason.
- If you have a disability like ADHD, you should inform the tribunal early and seek reasonable adjustments to help you comply with orders.
This case shows how quickly an employment claim can unravel when a claimant fails to meet basic procedural requirements. The former employee, who had worked for Nano Fibre UK Ltd for less than two years, brought an unfair dismissal claim that was doomed from the start: the law requires at least two years' continuous service to bring such a claim (unless the dismissal is for an automatically unfair reason like whistleblowing). The tribunal struck that part out early.
What went wrong
The claimant also had other claims (likely for holiday pay) that could have proceeded. But he did not comply with case management orders to provide a schedule of loss, evidence, or a witness statement. The day before the final hearing, he emailed the tribunal asking for the hearing to be stopped because his grandmother was terminally ill. The tribunal treated this as a postponement request but refused it, noting he had known about the hearing for months and had not prepared before his grandmother's illness.
Why the result matters
The tribunal emphasised that the claimant had not pursued his claim from the outset and had not explained why he was owed money. The respondent had prepared for the hearing, and tribunal resources had been allocated. Dismissing the claim was consistent with the overriding objective of dealing with cases fairly and efficiently. For anyone considering a tribunal claim, this case is a reminder that tribunals expect claimants to engage with the process from day one, and that last-minute personal difficulties will not always excuse a failure to prepare.
Similar cases
Eight claims struck out after tribunal finds conduct scandalous and vexatious
A former employee who filed eight separate claims against the Department for Education and others has had all claims struck out after the tribunal found his conduct scandalous, unreasonable and vexatious.
Claim struck out after failure to comply with tribunal orders
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim was struck out after he repeatedly failed to comply with tribunal orders, including providing a witness statement and further information.
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.
Claim dismissed after failure to attend hearing and lack of ACAS certificate
A former employee's claims for unfair dismissal and unauthorised deduction from wages were struck out or dismissed after he failed to attend the final hearing and had less than two years' service.