Case 4104626/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms C Campbell v The Governors of the Fettes Trust — 2022
- Case reference
- 4104626/2022
- Decision date
- 29 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Neilson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms C Campbell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs C Campbell was employed as a teacher by the Governors of the Fettes Trust from 1 September 2020 and was dismissed with immediate effect on 10 March 2022. The tribunal found that this was the effective date of termination. The parties agreed that the ET1 needed to be presented by 7 August 2022, subject to any ACAS early conciliation adjustment, and the claim was ultimately accepted when resubmitted on 22 August 2022 after an earlier rejected submission on 16 August 2022.
The only issue decided was whether it had been "not reasonably practicable" to present the claim within the primary time limit under section 111(2)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal accepted much of the claimant's evidence and found that she knew she had a right to bring a tribunal claim and knew there was a deadline, but misunderstood the process after the ACAS certificate was issued. It found that she had been told of the time limit issue by the EIS and later by a lawyer, and that she could have taken further steps to find out the correct position by asking for clarification or doing her own research.
The tribunal accepted that the claimant had experienced stress, grief, bereavement, travel disruption and housing difficulty in the relevant period, but held that those matters did not make it not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time. It also held that any failure by her lawyer to give complete advice could not be relied on as an impediment for the purposes of section 111(2)(b). Applying the authorities it cited, the tribunal concluded that the claim should have been presented within the original time limit and that it therefore had no jurisdiction to hear the proceedings. It did not go on to consider any extension beyond 22 August 2022 or any merits issue.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Potential s.100 ERA 1996 health and safety dismissal basis. The tribunal held the ET1 was presented out of time, found it was reasonably practicable to present the claim within the original limit, and therefore held that it had no jurisdiction to hear the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Potential s.103A ERA 1996 protected disclosure dismissal basis. The tribunal dismissed the proceedings on the same limitation/jurisdiction ruling and did not reach the merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- s.111(2)(b) ERA 1996
- not reasonably practicable test
- s.207A ERA 1996
- Dedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances
- Marks and Spencer v Williams-Ryan
- Cygnet Behavioural Health Limited v Britton
- Capital Foods Limited v Corrigan
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.