Mr D Cook v Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council: 1304216/2024
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Case No 1304216/2024
Between
Mr D CookClaimantWalsall Metropolitan Borough CouncilRespondent
Before
Employment Judge ChoudryIn person for claimantMr M Kelly (instructed by solicitor) for respondentDate 26 February 2025
JUDGMENT
The Claimant’s claim for unfair dismissal was not presented in time. The claimant did not show that it was not reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented on time, in accordance with s111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear the claim and it is struck out.
REASONS
[1]By a claim form presented to the Tribunal on 5 April 2024, the claimant brought a claim for unfair dismissal following his dismissal with effect from 16 October 2023 for gross misconduct. As such, the primary time limit expired on 15 January 2024. The claimant lodged an appeal against his dismissal on 20 December 2023 and was advised of the outcome of his appeal on 8 February 2024. The claimant contacted ACAS on the same day and early conciliation continued until 15 March 2024. The claimant then issued his claim on 5 April 2024.[2]The matter was listed for an open preliminary hearing for today to consider whether the claimant’s complaint of unfair dismissal was made within the time limits set out in section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (“ERA”).[3]In advance of the hearing I was presented with a bundle of some 30 pages. The claimant gave oral evidence under oath. Claimant’s evidence and findings of fact[4]The claimant was dismissed on 16 October 2023. The claimant duly appealed against the decision to dismiss him. The claimant was advised on 8 February 2024 that his appeal was not successful.[5]Early Conciliation commenced on 8 February 2024 and ended on 15 March 2024.[6]The Claim was issued on 5 April 2024.[7]In his evidence the claimant explained that he had not been aware of the statutory time limits nor had he been advised by ACAS, upon contacting them, that his claim was out of time. He had decided to await the appeal outcome before contacting ACAS.[8]The claimant contacted ACAS following a google search on the processes he needed to follow to pursue his claim. He also contacted the CAB. The claimant accepted that he may have seen the time limits and indeed ACAS may have advised him of the time limits in correspondence but ACAS did not notify him of the time limits during his calls with them. He also had a lot of information to take in.[9]The claimant was also not able to explain why his claim was not issued until almost 2 months after the early conciliation process was completed.
The Law
[10]Section 111 of the ERA provides: (1)A complaint may be presented to an employment tribunal against an employer by any person that he was unfairly dismissed by the employer. (2) Subject to the following provisions of this section, an employment tribunal shall not consider a complaint under this section unless it is presented to the tribunal— (a)before the end of the period of three months beginning with the effective date of termination, or (b)within such further period as the tribunal considers reasonable in a case where it is satisfied that it was not reasonably practicable for the complaint to be presented before the end of that period of three months.[11]In making my decision I have considered the guidance set out by the Court of Appeal in Marks & Spencer plc -v- Williams-Ryan [2005] EWCA Civ 470 which requires the tribunal to give a liberal interpretation in favour of the employee, have regard to what, if any, knowledge an employee had of the right to complain to an employment tribunal and the time limits for doing so. Regard should also be had for what knowledge the employee should have had, had they acted reasonably in the circumstances.
Conclusions
[12]I am satisfied based on the evidence provided that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to bring his claim in time. He made google searches, contacted the CAB and ACAS and in making these searches and contacts he ought to have been aware or made himself of any applicable time limits. The claimant indicated in evidence that he may have been made aware of the time limits in correspondence. Even if he had no knowledge of the time limits, the claimant should have made further enquiries in this regard. He was aware that he needed to contact ACAS before bringing a claim and he should also appraised himself of any applicable time limits. Furthermore, the claimant has provided no explanation as to why he waited almost two months after the end of early conciliation process to bring his claim.[13]As such, I conclude that the Claimant’s claim for unfair dismissal was not presented in time. The claimant did not show that it was not reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented on time, in accordance with s111 of the ERA. As such, the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear the claim and it is struck out.