In person, Assisted by her Husband For the v Respondent — 2021

This was a remote preliminary hearing to decide whether the claimant's remaining unfair dismissal claim was in time. Mrs Cathrine Wheeler had been employed by Renishaw plc as a Business Travel Consultant from 20 April 2015 until redundancy dismissal effective on 2 April 2020. The judgment notes that the claimant had originally brought disability discrimination claims as well, but those claims had already been withdrawn and then dismissed by a separate judgment sent on 18 March 2021, leaving only the unfair dismissal claim for this hearing.

The tribunal found that the three-month limitation period for an unfair dismissal claim expired on 1 July 2020. The claimant started ACAS early conciliation on 2 July 2020, received the certificate on the same day, and presented the claim form on 2 July 2020. The tribunal held that the claim was presented before early conciliation began and therefore did not benefit from any extension under s.207B ERA 1996, so it was one day out of time.

The tribunal accepted that the claimant had systemic scleroderma, pain, lethargy, anxiety and depression, and it accepted that she was upset after dismissal. However, it found no medical evidence showing that illness prevented her from issuing proceedings during the limitation period or immediately before it expired. It also found that she knew of her right to claim, knew about the ACAS process, had made a mistake about the time limit, had decided not to proceed until persuaded by a family friend, and had husband available to help her if needed.

Applying the authorities it cited on the meaning of 'reasonably practicable', including Palmer and Saunders v Southend-on-Sea BC, Porter v Bandridge Ltd, Wall's Meat Co v Khan, London Underground Ltd v Noel, Dedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances, Cullinane v Balfour Beattie Engineering Services Ltd and Wolverhampton University v Elbeltagi, the tribunal concluded that it was reasonably feasible for the claimant to have presented the claim in time. The tribunal therefore dismissed the remaining unfair dismissal claim as presented out of time.