Claimant v RJD Fabrications Ltd (In Administration) — 2020

This was a preliminary hearing on whether the claimant's Protective Award claim under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was in time. Employment Judge R S Drake sat alone. The claimant did not attend the hearing; the tribunal decided the issue on the papers, including the claimant's email of 20 July 2020 and the parties' written submissions.

The tribunal found that the claimant was summarily dismissed on 18 July 2019, which was the effective date of termination and the start of the limitation period. It held that the primary period expired on 17 October 2019. ACAS Early Conciliation was started on 4 March 2020 and ended on 20 March 2020, after expiry of the primary period, so it did not interrupt time. The claim was received by the tribunal on 24 March 2020, 159 days out of time.

On the evidence, the tribunal found that the claimant had not shown it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim within time, or that he had issued the claim within a reasonable time after expiry. It noted that he had been able to communicate with the tribunal by email, had produced no medical evidence, and had given no satisfactory explanation for the delay beyond saying that he had not received redundancy notifications and had seen former colleagues succeed in tribunal claims. The tribunal considered the prejudice to the respondent, including the difficulty of recalling events after a long passage of time, and found that the balance of prejudice favoured the respondent.

The tribunal referred to Dedman v British Building & Engineering Appliances Ltd, Porter v Bandridge Ltd, Palmer v Southend BC, Asda Stores Plc v Kauser, and Marks & Spencer Plc v Williams-Ryan. It concluded that the claim was time-barred and therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction, with the final order stating that the claim was struck out for want of jurisdiction.