Case 8001001/2025 · Employment Tribunal

Mr C Carr v The City of Edinburgh Council — 2026

Case reference: 8001001/2025
Decision date: 28 April 2026
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judge: Employment Judge Eccles

Indexed: 8 July 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr C Carr

Respondent

The City of Edinburgh Council

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The preliminary hearing determined whether Mr Carr's complaints of unfair dismissal, detriment for making a protected disclosure, and disability discrimination could proceed despite being presented out of time. The Tribunal found that Mr Carr was dismissed by The City of Edinburgh Council on 3 December 2024 and should have contacted ACAS or presented his claim no later than 2 March 2025. He contacted ACAS on 6 April 2025, received an early conciliation certificate dated 11 April 2025, and presented the accepted claim on 25 April 2025 after an earlier claim dated 15 April 2025 was rejected for missing early conciliation information.

For unfair dismissal and whistleblowing, the Tribunal applied the statutory test of whether it was not reasonably practicable to present the claims within three months. It found that Mr Carr had trade union contact after dismissal, knew about ACAS, CAB, Employment Tribunals and time limits, used the internet to make enquiries, and was able to pursue and attend an appeal. Although the Tribunal accepted that he had low mood, heavy alcohol use, and mental health issues which made engagement difficult at times, it was not persuaded that this made it not reasonably practicable to present the claims in time throughout the relevant period. The Tribunal refused to extend time and dismissed the unfair dismissal and whistleblowing complaints.

For disability discrimination, the Tribunal considered the alleged discriminatory act of dismissal on 3 December 2024 and applied the just and equitable extension test. It found that the respondent would not suffer material prejudice, that the cogency of evidence would not be materially affected because the dismissal was well documented, and that refusing an extension would prevent Mr Carr from pursuing the alleged disability discrimination claim. The Tribunal extended time to 25 April 2025 and directed that the disability discrimination complaint proceed, with further procedure to be addressed at a later preliminary hearing.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	Dismissed at a preliminary hearing because the complaint was presented out of time and the Tribunal did not extend time. Merits were not determined.	Dismissed	—	—
Whistleblowing	The detriment for making a protected disclosure complaint was dismissed because it was presented out of time and the Tribunal did not extend time. Merits were not determined.	Dismissed	—	—
Disability discrimination	The disability discrimination complaint was allowed to proceed after the Tribunal extended time on just and equitable grounds. Merits were not determined.	Other	Disability	—

Legal tests applied

5 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.