Unfair dismissal claim struck out: the two-year service rule in action
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim was struck out because she lacked the required two years' continuous service. Her wrongful dismissal claim was also struck out for having no reasonable prospect of success.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Key facts
- The claimant issued a claim for unfair dismissal on 25 June 2021.
- The respondent initially failed to present a valid response on time.
- The claimant did not have the required two years' continuous service to bring an unfair dismissal claim.
- The claim for wrongful dismissal was struck out for having no reasonable prospect of success.
- The claimant failed to make representations or request a hearing after being given an opportunity.
Timeline
-
Claim issued
Miss L Hill issued a claim for unfair dismissal in the Wales Employment Tribunals.
-
Initial judgment
Employment Judge Sharp ruled that the claim for unfair dismissal succeeded due to respondent's failure to respond.
-
Extension granted
Employment Judge G Duncan granted the respondent an extension of time to present a response and set aside the earlier judgment.
-
Unfair dismissal struck out
Tribunal Judge Lloyd-Lawrie struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant lacked two years' continuous service.
-
Reconsideration
Employment Judge S Moore revoked a previous judgment that found no discernible claim for wrongful dismissal.
-
Final strike out
Employment Judge S Moore struck out the wrongful dismissal claim for having no reasonable prospect of success.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant had the necessary two years' continuous employment to bring an unfair dismissal claim, and whether her wrongful dismissal claim had any reasonable prospect of success.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out both claims.
- The unfair dismissal claim was struck out because the claimant did not have the required two years' continuous service.
- The wrongful dismissal claim was struck out for having no reasonable prospect of success, after the claimant was given an opportunity to make representations but failed to do so.
No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- Check your continuous service length before bringing an unfair dismissal claim – you generally need at least two years.
- If the tribunal gives you a chance to respond to a strike-out warning, always do so in writing or request a hearing.
- A claim that has no reasonable prospect of success will be struck out early, saving time and costs.
This case shows the importance of meeting the basic eligibility requirements for an unfair dismissal claim. The former employee brought a claim against Tooth Fairies Ltd but did not have the two years' continuous service needed to bring such a claim. As a result, the unfair dismissal part was struck out.
What went wrong
The claimant also pursued a wrongful dismissal claim, but the tribunal found it had no reasonable prospect of success. After being given a chance to explain why it should not be struck out, she did not respond. That sealed the fate of the claim.
What this means for similar claims
For anyone considering an unfair dismissal claim, the first step is to check your length of service. If you have less than two years, you cannot bring a claim unless you fall into a narrow exception (such as discrimination or whistleblowing). Similarly, if the tribunal warns you that a claim may be struck out, take the opportunity to respond – silence is likely to lead to dismissal.
Similar cases
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.
Project engineer with under two years' service has unfair dismissal and discrimination claims struck out
A tribunal struck out a project engineer's unfair dismissal, sexual orientation discrimination, and wrongful dismissal claims after he was sacked for sending a confidential email to colleagues. His sex discrimination claim survived but required a £200 deposit.
HGV driver dismissed for watching YouTube videos while driving: claim struck out
An HGV driver with 10 years' service was dismissed for gross misconduct after a member of the public complained he was watching videos on his phone while driving. The tribunal struck out his unfair dismissal claim as having no reasonable prospect of success.
Strike-out for deaf former employee who tried to add new claims late
A tribunal struck out a deaf former employee's disability discrimination claim after she failed to comply with directions and attempted to add new claims that went beyond her original ET1.