Atack Natalia Chubar v By video conference Glasgow Caledonian University — 2019

This was a preliminary hearing on the issue of time bar. The claimant's ET1, presented on 20 March 2018, alleged unfair dismissal and breach of contract arising from employment that ended on 30 January 2017. The tribunal held that the unfair dismissal complaint was outside the three-month limit in section 111(2) ERA 1996, which on its calculation required presentation by 29 April 2017.

The claimant said she had been looking for alternative employment in Ukraine and would not have pursued the tribunal claim if she had obtained another job. The tribunal rejected that as a reason why it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time. Referring to Palmer v Southend-on-Sea Borough Council, Porter v Bandridge Ltd, and Wall's Meat Co Ltd v Khan, the tribunal said the claimant was an academic used to research, was able to check her rights, and was under no physical impediment to presenting a claim within time.

The tribunal also rejected the claimant's reliance on information she received from her file in about October or November 2017. It held that this did not make late presentation not reasonably practicable, and that her stated reasons did not explain why the claim could not have been brought within the initial three-month period. Because she had not shown that late presentation was excused, the tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to consider the unfair dismissal and breach of contract complaints and dismissed them. The claimant's later early conciliation application in March 2018 did not assist because it came after the relevant time limit had already expired.