Ms S El-Raie v Cranfield Solutions Ltd: 6020979/2025
JUDGMENT
The complaint of unfair dismissal is struck out.REASONS
[1]By a letter dated 2 July 2025 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations why the claim should not be struck out because she appeared to lack the two years’ continuous employment usually required to bring a claim of unfair dismissal.[2]The claimant has provided detailed representations and has not requested a hearing. I am satisfied that it is not necessary to have a hearing and so I consider strike out on the papers. I have considered in particular the claimant's document headed "Strike Out Warning – Case No. 6020979/2025". I also note the claimant's clarification (dated 2/7/25) that the claim is against Cranfield Solutions Limited and her further clarification (same date) about the dates of employment. Nothing in the claim form or in the written representations suggests that any of the exceptions to the usual rule in s 108 Employment Rights Act 1996 apply here. The claimant was not continuously employed for not less than two years and the Tribunal therefore has no jurisdiction to consider a complaint of unfair dismissal.[3]I do however note that, reading the claim form as whole, and in particular box 9.2, there does appear to be a claim for one week’s notice pay due following the claimant’s resignation because of what she says was the respondent’s repudiatory breach of contract, even though the relevant box at 8.1 has not been ticked. The claim for notice pay is unaffected by this judgment and so that may be pursued; I have made separate directions about that. The claimant should keep in mind however that even if the claim is successful she is unlikely to be awarded more than one week’s wages. Case No: 6020979/2025 Approved by: