Miss Joanne McIntyre v Highfields Inclusion Partnership — 2021

This was a preliminary hearing on limitation. Miss Joanne McIntyre was employed by Highfields Inclusion Partnership as a Scale 4 Teaching Assistant from 8 November 2017 until she was summarily dismissed on 9 December 2020. She presented her ET1 on 27 April 2021, claiming unfair dismissal, breach of contract (notice pay), and unauthorised deductions from wages. The tribunal accepted that the effective date of dismissal was 9 December 2020 and that the last payment of wages was 15 December 2020, so the ordinary time limits expired on 8 March 2021 for the dismissal and breach of contract claims and on 14 March 2021 for the wages claim.

The tribunal also dealt with the ACAS early conciliation certificates. It amended the ET1 to rely on the earlier ACAS reference, with a receipt date of 8 April 2021, but found that early conciliation had started after the original limitation periods had already expired, so it did not stop the clock in this case. The issue therefore became whether it was not reasonably practicable for the claimant to present the claims in time, and if so whether they were then presented within a reasonable further period.

The tribunal accepted that the claimant was living in fear, anxious and distressed during the relevant period because of domestic violence, threats, stalking and harassment by her ex-partner. It accepted that she was not functioning normally and that she had limited internet access, but it also found that she remained able to speak to friends and family about the dismissal, maintain her mobile phone, receive a link to ACAS forms, and pursue an appeal against dismissal. The tribunal concluded that she was not ignorant of the possibility of challenging the dismissal and that, despite the difficult circumstances, she had sufficient capacity to have taken steps to present the claims in time.

The tribunal therefore held that the claimant had not shown that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claims within the statutory time limits. It did not go on to consider whether any late presentation had been within a further reasonable period. All three claims were dismissed for want of jurisdiction.