Mr Gary Crickmay v Bayleaf Janitorial Supplies Limited — 2022

The tribunal found that the dismissal telephone conversation took place on 7 July 2020, not 31 July 2020, and treated that date as the effective date of termination. It preferred Mr Jezia's evidence on that issue and relied on the surrounding documents, including contemporaneous complaints from HW Catering and material relating to the Claimant's mobile telephone account. On that basis, the unfair dismissal, breach of contract or wrongful dismissal, unlawful deduction from wages, and holiday pay claims were presented outside the statutory time limits.

The tribunal held that ACAS early conciliation could not rescue the claims because the relevant time limit had already expired if 7 July 2020 was the correct dismissal date. It rejected the submission that it had not been reasonably practicable to present the claims in time, finding no specific explanation from the Claimant beyond the general circumstances of the pandemic. The claims were therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

If it had been necessary to decide employment status, the tribunal said that Mr Crickmay would not have been an employee within section 230 ERA 1996, but would have met the wider definition of worker. It relied on the absence of set hours, formal monitoring, contractual sick leave or holiday entitlement, and the fact that he invoiced the Respondent and self-assessed to HMRC. The tribunal also recorded that the dismissal was by a short telephone call, with no investigation, consultation, or formal disciplinary process.