In person For the v McLaren Automotive Limited — 2022

Mr Ozcelebi began working for McLaren Automotive Limited on 21 June 2021 and presented a claim on 7 April 2022 alleging automatic unfair dismissal and detriment for public interest disclosures, together with an application for interim relief. On reconsideration, the tribunal's task was not to assess the merits of those allegations, but to decide whether the original rejection of the claim for want of an early conciliation certificate had been correct.

The decisive issue was the effective date of termination. The tribunal found, on the balance of probabilities, that the dismissal took effect on the afternoon of 30 March 2022, when Mr Clement and Ms Cooper told the claimant that he was dismissed, required him to hand over his laptop and escorted him from the building. It rejected the claimant's evidence that the events on 30 March were ambiguous and rejected his argument that dismissal could not take effect until it was confirmed in writing on 1 April 2022. The tribunal also said that the fact that final pay was not received until 29 April 2022 did not change the statutory effective date of termination, and it distinguished Geys while relying on section 97 ERA 1996 and the authorities in Dedman and Rabess.

Because the effective date of termination was 30 March 2022, the seven-day period for a section 128 interim-relief application expired before the claim was presented on 7 April 2022. The tribunal held that a late interim-relief application does not fall within the regulation 3(1)(d) early conciliation exemption, so an ACAS certificate was required before the proceedings were instituted. It therefore confirmed the Rule 12(1)(d) rejection, held that the certificate obtained on 8 April 2022 did not cure the defect, and dismissed the reconsideration application.