Ms J Rich v Sussex Partnership Foundation Trust — 2019

This was a preliminary hearing on whether Ms J Rich’s ET1 had been presented in time and in the correct form, and, if not, whether time should be extended. The claimant’s solicitors had started an online ET1 on 3 April 2018 but then emailed the form and particulars to the London South Employment Tribunal rather than completing presentation through one of the prescribed methods. The tribunal recorded that the claimant’s claim was for unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal.

The tribunal held that the ET1 was not presented in accordance with Rule 8 and the Presidential Practice Direction made under regulation 11, because it was neither submitted online, posted to the Leicester Central Office, nor delivered in person. It found there was no basis to treat the London South office as having validly received the claim for presentation purposes, and it rejected arguments based on Rules 10, 12 and 13 because the issue was an administrative failure to present the claim validly, not a judicial rejection of a properly presented claim.

On limitation under s.111 ERA 1996, the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present the claim by 5 April 2018. It relied on the fact that the claimant’s secretary had already started the online process and drew the solicitors’ attention the following day to the problem with emailing the ET1, but the defect was not corrected until 22 May 2018. The tribunal therefore refused to extend time under s.111(2)(b) ERA 1996 and dismissed the claim. The final line of the judgment refers to the claim being dismissed, and the subsequent further preliminary hearing listed for privacy, anonymity, EDT and case management was vacated.