Mr T Charlesworth v Dolphin School Ltd and 1 other — 2022

The Tribunal amended the respondent names to Dolphin School Ltd and Dolphin School 1970 LLP. It identified two claims: unfair dismissal said to arise on 13 April 2019, and a detriment claim for making protected disclosures, with the last possible detriment said to be in October 2019. ACAS early conciliation did not begin until 24 November 2021 and the ET1 was presented on 25 January 2022.

The Tribunal found that both claims were outside the primary three-month time limits in sections 111(2)(a) and 48(3)(a) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It accepted the Claimant's evidence that, before and after the dismissal, he had been told that if he caused difficulties for the Respondent or acted unreasonably, his three children could be required to leave Dolphin School. The Tribunal found that those threats had a chilling effect while the children remained at the school, and that it was not reasonably practicable for him to bring the claims within the primary time limits.

The Tribunal then considered whether the claims were presented within such further period as was reasonable. It found that the deterrent effect ended by the end of July 2020, when all three children had left the school. By August 2020 at the latest, the Claimant was able to complain about the Respondent to other bodies, including Thames Valley Police, Wokingham Borough Council, the Independent Schools Inspectorate and later the Department for Education, and the Tribunal saw no reason why he could not also have brought Employment Tribunal claims at that point.

The Tribunal held that a reasonable extension would have required the claims to be brought by 30 September 2020. It rejected the Claimant's reliance on his view that the claims were already too late, his mental health difficulties, and the referral to children's services as explanations for the later delay. It therefore dismissed both the unfair dismissal and whistleblowing detriment claims for want of jurisdiction.