Case 4101867/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms C Sloan v Boots Management Services Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 4101867/2020
- Decision date
- 16 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Robison
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms C Sloan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought a claim for unfair dismissal after being dismissed on 26 September 2019. She had contacted ACAS in around November 2019 but initially decided not to proceed. She later changed her mind, contacted ACAS again around 2 February 2020, received an early conciliation certificate on 6 February 2020, and lodged her ET1 on 21 March 2020.
The Tribunal found that the claim should have been lodged by 25 December 2019, or at least that the claimant should have contacted ACAS by the next working day, 27 December 2019, to obtain the benefit of early conciliation time extensions. The claim was therefore out of time.
The Tribunal accepted the claimant as candid and credible, but found that she knew she had a right to claim unfair dismissal and that time limits applied. It found that her misunderstanding of ACAS advice and failure to make further enquiries did not show that it was not reasonably practicable to lodge the claim in time. The Tribunal also stated that the later six-week delay after receiving the early conciliation certificate would not in any event have been a reasonable time thereafter. The claim was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed because it was lodged out of time and the Tribunal was not satisfied that it was not reasonably practicable to lodge it in time; the Tribunal found it had no jurisdiction to hear the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- s.111(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- reasonable practicability
- Lowri Beck Services Ltd v Brophy
- Marks and Spencer plc v Williams-Ryan
- Dedman v British Building & Engineering Appliances Ltd
- Palmer and Saunders v Southend-on-Sea Borough Council
- Wall's Meat Co Ltd v Khan
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.