In person For the v Respondent — 2021

This was a preliminary hearing concerning Mr Paul Essex's claims against Bluesnow Ltd t/a Richard Thomas Conservatories, Extensions & Windows. The respondent terminated the relationship with immediate effect on 27 March 2020. The tribunal had to decide whether the unfair dismissal, breach of contract and holiday pay claims were in time, and whether any in-time claim required a status decision, but the merits of employment status were not determined because the limitation issue disposed of those claims.

The tribunal held that the unfair dismissal claim was presented out of time. The effective date of termination was 27 March 2020, so the three-month limit expired at midnight on 26 June 2020. Mr Essex did not contact ACAS until 31 July 2020 and presented proceedings on 4 October 2020, after the primary limit had expired. Applying the reasonably practicable test under section 111(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and referring to Wall's Meat Co v Khan, Porter v Bandridge Ltd, Palmer and Saunders v Southend-on-Sea BC, London Underground Ltd v Noel, Cullinane v Balfour Beattie Engineering Services Ltd and Wolverhampton University v Elbeltagi, the tribunal found there was no physical impediment, no misrepresentation by the respondent, and no sufficient explanation for the delay. It also noted that Mr Essex had access to the internet, ACAS and specialist employment advice.

For the breach of contract and accrued but unpaid holiday pay claims, the tribunal held that the same limitation problem applied under the relevant jurisdiction order and the Working Time Regulations 1998. Those claims were therefore dismissed. The sole remaining statutory redundancy payment claim was within time, but the parties had agreed settlement terms; the tribunal adjourned to allow those terms to be implemented and provided that, unless a relisting application was made by 30 April 2021, the claim would stand dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant.