Apprentice candidate Katie Hopkins plans to take her former employer, the Met Office, to an employment tribunal.

The 31-year-old was fired from her job as a brand consultant on Monday when she returned to work after more than two months on the BBC One reality show.

She had decided to return to the Met Office rather than accept an offer of a place in The Apprentice final.

Winning the show would have seen her given a £100,000 a year job with Sir Alan Sugar.

Hopkins could have difficulty at the tribunal as she only joined the Met Service in autumn 2006 and was on probation.

Employment solicitor Samantha Mangwana, of Russell Jones & Walker, said in order to take a claim to the employment tribunal a claim of unfair dismissal or discrimination must be made.

Hopkins, however, would only have the option of claiming discrimination as she worked at the Met Office for such a brief period.

“You don’t have protection against unfair dismissal if you’ve been working less than 12 months unless there has been discrimination.”

A Met Office spokesman said Hopkins had not met the standards required of an employee during her probation period.

“She didn’t make it through her probation period. All civil servants have a probation period and Katie failed to pass those reviews.”

Asked whether Hopkins’s appearance on The Apprentice had led to her dismissal, the spokesman said: “My comment would be to run through a few aspects of probation - attendance, time-keeping and conduct.”

While on the show, Hopkins flirted with Sir Alan and fellow contestant Paul Callaghan and last week pictures of her cavorting naked in a cornfield with a colleague from the Met Office were splashed across the tabloids.

Her duplicitous dealings with other contestants also made headlines, but it was her decision to turn down a place in the final that garnered the most attention.

The only person ever to leave The Apprentice voluntarily, Hopkins told a furious Sir Alan she was walking out because she was concerned about moving her children from Exeter to London if she won the job with him.

Sir Alan had previously asked Hopkins if she was willing to uproot her family and she had assured him she was.

The famous entrepreneur has since been criticised for the way he dealt with Hopkins, with some saying it was sexist and discriminatory of him to ask Hopkins about her childcare arrangements.

Speaking on GMTV today, Sir Alan defended his approach, saying it would be "condescending" not to ask a mother planning to move to London for a job how she would manage.

"You go and ask 100 women in the street whether they would like me to deal with it that way, or whether they would like me to be condescending, follow all the rules in an eco-friendly green office, with six human resources managers around me. I'll tell you what, they would all say, 'you are right Sir Alan, I appreciate you asking me the question'."

Employment lawyer James Davies, of Lewis Silkin, said there was nothing discriminatory about Sir Alan’s treatment of Hopkins. “Contrary to popular opinion, it’s not unlawful to ask these questions. The real question is whether you reject the person because you’re concerned about child care arrangements.”

Sir Alan said he was disappointed with Hopkins’s decision to leave The Apprentice, saying she had always known winning the show would mean moving to London.

"I just don't understand her really, she is a very, very intelligent person and I only hope that one day she will start directing that intelligence of hers in a more productive way.

"I think she will reflect back in a few years time and realise that she may have wasted some time in doing what she is doing now."

The final of The Apprentice screens tonight and will see Kristina Grimes, 36, and Simon Ambrose, 27, fight for the job with Sir Alan.

Editor's choice

• The 100 Best Films of the Decade
• 70 facts you didn't know about Marvel
• The 50 Biggest Movies Of 2010