Case 6010070/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Coulam v The Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset Constabulary — 2025
- Case reference
- 6010070/2025
- Decision date
- 26 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Livesey Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Coulam
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought a complaint of constructive unfair dismissal relating to employment that ended in October 2024. He contacted ACAS in March 2025 and presented the claim on 23 March 2025, which the tribunal recorded as approximately two months out of time.
The claimant said he did not know this route was open to him and only sought advice in March 2025. The tribunal found that he had not provided medical evidence supporting an impairment that prevented him acting earlier, and noted that he had obtained new employment in January 2025 and was working during the period of delay.
The tribunal concluded that it had been feasible for the claim to have been issued sooner and that the claimant ought reasonably to have researched his rights earlier. The claim was therefore out of time under s.111 Employment Rights Act 1996 and the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to hear it.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The complaint was described as constructive unfair dismissal and was dismissed because it was presented outside the time limit in s.111 Employment Rights Act 1996; the tribunal found it had been reasonably practicable to present it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
18 references- s.111 Employment Rights Act 1996
- reasonably practicable
- reasonable feasibility
- Marks & Spencer v Williams-Ryan
- Northamptonshire County Council v Entwhistle
- Porter v Bandridge Ltd
- Palmer and Saunders v Southend-on-Sea Borough Council
- Schultz v Esso Petroleum Ltd
- Trevelyans (Birmingham) Ltd v Norton
- Cygnet Behavioural Health Ltd v Britton
- Bodha v Hampshire Area Health Authority
- John Lewis Partnership v Charman
- Dedman v British Building
- BLISS Residential Care Ltd v Fellows
- Cullinane v Balfour Beatty
- Theobald v Royal Bank of Scotland
- Harvey's Household Linens v Benson
- Alexanders Holdings v Methven
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.