Mr S Taylor v Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation — 2020

Mr Taylor was employed by the Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation under a fixed-term contract that included a clause allowing the Chairperson, after consultation and acting in conjunction with the vice chairpersons, to terminate for poor performance, inefficiency, or gross misconduct. After suspension and disciplinary proceedings in 2018, the disciplinary panel recommended summary dismissal and Mr Shivnesh Prasad sent the claimant a letter dated 20 November 2018 stating that the CTO adopted that decision and that the claimant’s last day of employment was that day.

The tribunal held that the effective date of termination was 20 November 2018. It found that the 20 November letter unambiguously communicated dismissal, and that the claimant knew that on the day it was sent. Although Mr Prasad had not consulted the vice chairpersons before sending the letter, and had not convened ExCo, the tribunal held that this did not postpone the statutory EDT. It also found, in the alternative, that the decision was ratified later in November and December 2018, or at the latest by 19 February 2019 when ExCo approved the appeal hearing procedure. Later salary payments did not change the EDT; they were found to be administrative errors rather than a decision to continue employment.

On limitation, the tribunal found that the unfair dismissal, breach of contract, WTR payment-in-lieu-of-leave, and unlawful deduction claims were all presented out of time. Because the EDT was 20 November 2018, the claimant should have started early conciliation or presented his claim within the relevant three-month periods by February 2019. For the wages claim, the last actual wage payment was 30 November 2018, so time ran from then. The tribunal rejected the claimant’s case that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claims in time, finding that he and his advisers knew of the risk that 20 November 2018 would be treated as the termination date and chose to delay for tactical reasons. The tribunal allowed a narrow amendment based on the 11 March 2020 letter about quoracy, but that did not alter the outcome. All complaints were dismissed.