Mr Makh (trade union representative) For the v Ms Urmston (solicitor) — 2020

At a preliminary hearing on 14 July 2020, Employment Judge E Burns considered only whether Mr S Atkinson's unfair dismissal claim had been presented in time under section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant had been verbally dismissed on 15 August 2019 and paid in lieu of two weeks' notice. He started ACAS early conciliation on 21 September 2019 and received a certificate on 6 October 2019; the parties agreed that the modified limitation period ended on 29 November 2019.

The claimant submitted a claim form online on 15 November 2019, but named his employer as "Booker Wholesale" rather than Booker Limited. The tribunal wrote on 28 November 2019 rejecting the claim because the respondent name on the claim form did not match the name on the ACAS certificate. The claimant's representative then applied for reconsideration on 5 December 2019, and the claim was treated as received on that date with Booker Limited substituted for Booker.

Applying section 111(2)(b) ERA 1996, section 97(1)(b) ERA 1996, the ACAS extension provisions in section 207B(3) and (4), and the authorities including Marks & Spencer plc v Williams-Ryan, Dedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances Ltd, London Borough of Islington v Brown, Adams v British Telecom PLC and Wall's Meat Co Ltd v Khan, the tribunal held that it was not reasonably practicable for the corrected claim to be presented within the normal time limit and that the reconsideration application was made within a reasonable further period. The tribunal accepted that the claimant genuinely believed he had named the correct employer, that the union was not advising him during early conciliation, and that he only learned of the defect after the normal time limit had expired. The tribunal therefore held that it had jurisdiction to consider the unfair dismissal claim; this hearing did not determine the merits of the dismissal complaint.