Miss A M Isaac v Pierce & Geddes Limited — 2021

The claimant, Miss A M Isaac, presented claims of unfair dismissal and defamation. At a preliminary hearing on 26 November 2021 before Employment Judge Smith sitting alone, the tribunal first dealt with an application to amend the claim form to add harassment. That application was refused. The tribunal applied Selkent Bus Company Ltd v Moore and noted that the proposed harassment allegation was significantly out of time, that the claimed link to Roman Catholic religious beliefs was tenuous, and that the respondent would be prejudiced by having to answer very old allegations.

The tribunal then held that it had no jurisdiction to determine defamation claims, because employment tribunal jurisdiction is statutory and no express power conferred jurisdiction over defamation. The defamation claim was therefore dismissed.

On the unfair dismissal claim, the tribunal assumed for the purpose of the hearing that the claimant had been an employee, but found that her employment or engagement ended on 31 March 2016. It held that the primary time limit under s.111 ERA 1996 expired on 30 June 2016 and that the claim, presented on 30 July 2021 after early conciliation on 28 July 2021, was far out of time. Applying the reasonably practicable test, and referring to authorities including London International College v Sen, Palmer and Saunders v Southend-on-Sea Borough Council, Walls' Meat Co Ltd v Khan, and Dedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances Ltd, the tribunal found that the claimant's health did not prevent her from lodging an ET1 in time. It relied on evidence that she moved house, made multiple job applications, attended interviews, started a new job on 2 June 2016, and later sent strongly worded letters threatening legal action. The tribunal also said that, even if it were wrong on reasonable practicability, it would not have granted an extension of time because a five-year delay was not reasonable. All claims were dismissed.