Miss L Alexander v Represented by: Ms R Page Solicitor GEOAmey PECS Limited — 2021

This was a preliminary hearing on whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear Miss L Alexander’s unfair dismissal claim. The Tribunal found that her effective date of termination was 18 March 2020 and that, because ACAS Early Conciliation had not been started within the three-month time limit, the claim needed to be presented by 17 June 2020. The ET1 was not filed until 24 August 2020, so it was 68 days out of time.

The Tribunal accepted that the claimant had been dealing with experienced union representatives, that she had been told they would commence ACAS Early Conciliation, and that she relied on that assurance. It also accepted that on 5 June 2020 she asked about ACAS and the limitation date, and that the union then told her the limitation period was three months less one day from dismissal. However, the Tribunal found that the claimant knew by then that she could bring an unfair dismissal claim and knew the relevant time limit, and that any fault by the union in failing to act was attributable to her for the purposes of the time limit.

The Tribunal also considered the claimant’s mental health evidence and the two overdoses in February and March 2020, and accepted that this was an extremely difficult period for her. It nevertheless found that the medical evidence did not show that her health difficulties prevented her from presenting the claim in time, noting that she was able to communicate with the union during the relevant period and started new employment on 2 August 2020. The Tribunal therefore held that it was reasonably practicable to present the complaint within time.

In case that primary conclusion was wrong, the Tribunal held that the claim was not brought within a further reasonable period either. It said that after being told on 29 July 2020 that the claim was time barred, the claimant did not act with the required sense of urgency, even if she had believed the clock ran from the appeal decision on 7 May 2020. The unfair dismissal claim was therefore dismissed because the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it.