Case 4105539/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L Kinloch v Ministry of Justice — 2018
- Case reference
- 4105539/2017
- Decision date
- 22 March 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Whitcombe
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss L Kinloch
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant brought a complaint of unfair dismissal arising from her summary dismissal on 3 August 2017. The Tribunal recorded that she had not brought any other claims arising from the dismissal or employment. It was common ground that the last day for presenting an unfair dismissal complaint in time was 2 November 2017, but ACAS early conciliation notification and the claim form were submitted on 3 November 2017.
The Claimant argued that it had not been reasonably practicable to present the claim in time because of her health and state of mind, together with an arithmetical error by her PCS representative about the deadline. The Tribunal accepted that she had experienced distress and impaired communication after dismissal, but found no medical evidence supporting the contention that her condition made timely presentation not reasonably practicable. It also found that, with PCS assistance, she had been able to participate in the disciplinary and appeal processes during the relevant period.
The Tribunal held that the representative's miscalculation could not make timely presentation not reasonably practicable where the Claimant was assisted by a skilled adviser. It concluded that the Claimant had failed to show that it was not reasonably practicable to bring the complaint within the three month time limit, and dismissed the claim for lack of jurisdiction.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claim was dismissed at a preliminary hearing because it was presented one day outside the section 111 ERA 1996 time limit and the Tribunal found it had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- section 111(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 111(2A) Employment Rights Act 1996
- not reasonably practicable
- Dedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances Ltd
- Times Newspapers v O'Regan
- Northamptonshire County Council v Entwhistle
- Marks & Spencer PLC v Williams-Ryan
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.