In person For the v Mr D Soanes, Solicitor — 2019

The tribunal dealt only with a preliminary limitation issue on Mr M Kelly's unfair dismissal claim against Coinford Ltd. It found the effective date of termination was 26 October 2018, day A was 15 January 2019, day B was 12 February 2019, and the ET1 was submitted on 14 March 2019. On that basis, the tribunal held that the time limit expired on 12 March 2019, so the claim was late by two days.

The tribunal accepted that Mr Kelly had union representation during the disciplinary and conciliation process and that the union wrote to him on 21 February 2019, with receipt by 22 or 23 February. That letter stated that the early conciliation certificate had been issued on 12 February 2019 and told him to submit an ET1 as soon as possible to avoid falling foul of the statutory limitations. The tribunal also noted that he emailed the tribunal on 14 March saying he had hastily submitted the ET1 and was worried about running out of time, which showed he still did not know the deadline when he filed.

Applying section 111(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the ACAS early conciliation extension in section 207B, the tribunal considered whether it was not reasonably practicable for the claim to be presented in time and, if so, whether any further extension was reasonable. It referred to Palmer v Southend on Sea Borough Council and Cullinane v Balfour Beatty. The tribunal found that, although Mr Kelly had not been given an exact date and was unhappy with the advice he received, he was on notice by 23 February 2019 at the latest that he needed to act as soon as possible and gave no cogent reason for the delay between 23 February and 12 March beyond being busy and pursuing the union appeal. It therefore held that it was reasonably practicable to submit the claim by 12 March 2019 and dismissed the unfair dismissal claim as out of time.