Mr D Kalazi (Representative) For the v Mr E Nuttman (Solicitor) — 2019

This was a preliminary hearing on limitation only. The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that the dismissal letter of 6 June 2018 notified him of dismissal effective after 12 weeks' statutory notice, rather than summarily ending his employment that day. On that basis the effective date of termination was 30 August 2018, so the claim presented on 5 July 2018 was within the three-month time limit and the unfair dismissal claim was allowed to continue to a full merits hearing.

In reaching that conclusion, the tribunal relied on the wording of the dismissal and appeal letters referring to 'statutory dismissal', the absence of live evidence from the respondent on how the dismissal was said to operate, and the claimant's evidence that he was not required to work during notice but remained employed throughout the notice period. It referred to the statutory provisions on effective date of termination in s.97 ERA 1996 and to case law on notice periods and whether the EDT can be brought forward.

The tribunal also addressed the ACAS early conciliation certificates and the later correction of the respondent's name. It said that, even if the respondent were right that the claim was out of time, the claimant would have had a strong argument under s.111(2) ERA 1996 and the reasonably practicable test because he had corrected the ACAS details, believed the defect had been remedied, and only learned later that the tribunal had rejected the claim. The claims for harassment, discrimination on the grounds of race and age, holiday pay and breach of contract were dismissed upon withdrawal. There was no remedy award because no substantive liability hearing took place.