Claimant v Nwama v Accomplish Group Ltd — 2025

The claimant, Mr V Nwama, was dismissed on 7 December 2023 following a disciplinary hearing on 27 November 2023. He presented an unfair dismissal claim on 12 April 2024. The tribunal recorded that the applicable time limit expired on 6 March 2024, taking account of early conciliation rules, so the claim was 5 weeks and 3 days out of time.

The hearing was limited to limitation issues under section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and section 207B. The claimant said he did not know the ACAS process or the time limit, was waiting for an internal appeal outcome, and after a road traffic accident on 11 February 2024 he suffered back and shoulder pain that prevented him from taking steps to bring the claim. The tribunal accepted that he was sincere and that he had some genuine illness and pain, but noted that the medical evidence did not corroborate the extent of immobility or explain why he could not have used a telephone or email.

The tribunal found that it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented in time. It held that the claimant had already been put on enquiry because he knew he could challenge the dismissal, had searched online for a solicitor on 7 February 2024, and had drafted an appeal saying he had been unfairly dismissed. The tribunal applied the authorities it cited on the strict and fact-sensitive meaning of "reasonably practicable", including Bodha, Porter v Bandridge, Trevelyans, and Midland Bank v Samuels.

In the alternative, the tribunal held that even if it had not been reasonably practicable to present the claim by 6 March 2024, the claim was not brought within a reasonable further period. It accepted that the claimant had been told, incorrectly, that he had one month after the ACAS certificate, but held that this mistaken belief did not make the delay reasonable. The unfair dismissal claim was therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction on time limit grounds.