Case 4105363/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L McArthur v The City of Edinburgh Council — 2023
- Case reference
- 4105363/2022
- Decision date
- 20 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Jones
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L McArthur
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was dismissed on 12 May 2022 and lodged his claim on 30 September 2022. The tribunal considered whether it had been reasonably practicable for him to present his unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal claims within the three-month time limit, and if not whether they had been presented within a further reasonable period.
The tribunal found that the claimant had obtained alternative employment within a month of dismissal, had access to email and the internet, was a trade union member represented at the disciplinary and appeal hearings, and had contacted an employment solicitor around the time he appealed. Although the tribunal accepted that the dismissal and surrounding circumstances were stressful and that the claimant did not know the time limit until contacting ACAS, it found no evidence that these matters prevented him investigating or presenting a claim in time.
The tribunal held that ignorance of rights and waiting for an appeal outcome were not, either separately or together, sufficient to show that it was not reasonably practicable to lodge the claims in time. It therefore concluded that it had no jurisdiction to consider the claims.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have lodged the unfair dismissal claim within the statutory period, so it did not have jurisdiction to determine the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment describes this as a wrongful dismissal claim and refers to the time limit for breach of contract claims under Article 7 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (Scotland) Order 1994. The tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction because the claim was presented out of time and it had been reasonably practicable to present it within the statutory period. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
8 references- s.111 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Article 7 Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (Scotland) Order 1994
- reasonably practicable
- Walls Meat Company Ltd v Khan
- Bodha v Hampshire Area Health Authority
- Palmer & another v Southend-on-sea Borough Council
- Dedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances Ltd
- RBS plc v Theobold
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.