Mr C Aston v Jim Walker and Company Ltd t/a I-Ride — 2017

The Claimant, Mr C Aston, had been absent from work from 8 June 2015 and did not return. After meetings and email exchanges in spring 2016 about a possible alternative role, the tribunal held that the employment ended on 17 May 2016. It found that the email exchange in May 2016, read objectively, was sufficiently clear to communicate that the Respondent was bringing the employment to an end, and it noted that the Claimant's request for a P45 supported that understanding.

The Claimant's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed because it was out of time and the tribunal held that it was reasonably practicable for him to have presented it within time. The tribunal accepted that he sought legal advice in good time, and it found that the significance of the May 2016 emails should have been apparent to both the Claimant and his solicitor. The tribunal referred to the relevant question under the Employment Rights Act 1996 and to the authorities relied on by the parties, including Sandle v Adecco UK Limited, Gale v Gilbert, Ebay (UK) Ltd v Miss T Buzzeo, and Dedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances Ltd.

The disability discrimination claim was also out of time, but the tribunal held that it was just and equitable to extend time for presentation of that claim. In reaching that conclusion it took into account the length of the delay, the lack of prejudice to the Respondent's evidence, the Claimant's prompt resort to legal advice, the nature of his disability, and the limited material before it as to the advice he actually received. The tribunal said the solicitor did not sufficiently consider the email chain that ended the employment and therefore did not appreciate its significance.

The tribunal did not determine the merits of the disability discrimination claim at this hearing. It recorded that the claim would proceed to a further hearing listed for 6 and 7 March 2018.