Case 4104512/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Mr James Gaffney v Represented by: Mr J Jardine –10 Representative TSB Bank plc — 2017
- Case reference
- 4104512/2017
- Decision date
- 21 December 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge P Wallington QC
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr James Gaffney
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr James Gaffney was dismissed by TSB Bank plc on 22 March 2017 and presented an unfair dismissal claim on 7 September 2017. The tribunal dealt only with a preliminary issue of time bar. It recorded that the primary limitation date for a claim or ACAS early conciliation was 21 June 2017.
The tribunal found that Mr Gaffney had handed responsibility for pursuing any remedy to the TSB Union well before the limitation date, and that the union was acting as a skilled adviser for the purposes of the delay cases. Although Mr Gaffney had earlier been unaware of the possibility of an Employment Tribunal claim, the tribunal found that by late May 2017 the possibility of an unfair dismissal claim was in the mind of the union official dealing with his case. It also found that no step was taken to start the claim process in time, and that the union did not apply to ACAS until 4 July 2017, after the deadline had passed.
Applying section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the authorities on whether it was reasonably practicable to present a claim in time, including Dedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances Ltd and related cases, the tribunal held that the claimant had not shown that it was not reasonably practicable for the union, acting as his agent, to start the process within the statutory period. The tribunal therefore found that it had no jurisdiction over the unfair dismissal claim and dismissed it. It said it was not necessary to decide whether the eventual presentation on 7 September 2017 was within a reasonable period after 21 June 2017.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed as time barred. The tribunal held the claim was not presented within the statutory time limit and that it had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.111 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.111A Employment Rights Act 1996
- reasonably practicable test
- Dedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances Ltd [1974] ICR 53
- Friend v Institution of Professional Managers [1999] IRLR 137
- Cullinane v Balfour Beatty Engineering Services Ltd UKEAT/0537/10
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.