Partial win £566 awarded Employment Tribunal · 28 March 2023

Unfair dismissal claim struck out due to less than two years' service

A former employee's unfair dismissal claim was struck out because they had worked for the employer for less than two years. However, they won a small award for unpaid notice pay.

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's unfair dismissal complaint was struck out due to insufficient service.
  • The claimant succeeded in a claim for unlawful deduction from wages for unpaid notice pay.
  • The respondent was ordered to pay £565.61 for two weeks' net pay less three days' overtaken holiday.

Timeline

  1. Start of notice period

    The claimant's notice period began on 3 June 2022.

  2. End of notice period

    The claimant's notice period ended on 17 June 2022.

  3. First judgment (strike out of unfair dismissal)

    Employment Judge Howard struck out the unfair dismissal complaint due to insufficient service.

  4. Substantive hearing

    The claim for unlawful deduction from wages was heard by Employment Judge K M Ross.

  5. Judgment on unlawful deduction claim

    The tribunal found in favour of the claimant and ordered payment of £565.61.

The outcome

The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal complaint as the claimant had less than two years' continuous service, which is a legal requirement under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

The claim for unlawful deduction from wages succeeded. The respondent had failed to pay the claimant's notice pay for the two-week notice period.

Compensation:

  • Total award: £565.61
  • Two weeks' net pay: £807.98
  • Less three days' overtaken holiday: £242.37

Lessons & takeaways

  • Employees with less than two years' continuous service generally cannot bring an unfair dismissal claim, unless the dismissal is for an automatically unfair reason.
  • Employers must pay notice pay unless the employee is dismissed for gross misconduct or has no contractual right to notice.
  • If you believe you are owed wages, including notice pay, you can bring a claim for unlawful deduction from wages regardless of your length of service.
  • Tribunals will strike out claims that have no reasonable prospect of success, such as unfair dismissal claims by employees with insufficient service.

This case highlights a common pitfall for employees bringing unfair dismissal claims: the requirement of at least two years' continuous service. The former employee, who worked for Alan Holmes t/a Art Services for less than two years, had their unfair dismissal complaint struck out at an early stage. The tribunal noted that the claimant had failed to provide any acceptable reason why the claim should not be struck out.

However, the case was not a total loss. The claimant also brought a claim for unlawful deduction from wages, specifically for unpaid notice pay. The tribunal found that the employer had failed to pay the claimant's notice pay for the two-week notice period from 3 June 2022 to 17 June 2022. The respondent was ordered to pay £565.61, representing two weeks' net pay less three days' overtaken holiday.

What this means for similar claims

For employees, the key takeaway is that length of service matters for unfair dismissal claims. If you have less than two years' service, you may still have other claims, such as unlawful deduction from wages, discrimination, or automatically unfair dismissal (e.g., for whistleblowing or asserting statutory rights). It is worth checking all possible avenues before focusing solely on unfair dismissal.

For employers, this case is a reminder that even if a dismissal claim fails on jurisdictional grounds, other claims like unpaid wages can succeed. Employers must ensure they pay all wages due, including contractual or statutory notice pay, unless a valid deduction applies (e.g., for overpaid holiday). The respondent here was ordered to pay a relatively small sum, but the cost of defending the claim and the reputational impact could have been avoided by paying the notice pay promptly.

Similar cases