Claimant v Ellidore Events Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim presented 21 days out of time. Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have filed in time. The claimant's assertion that she believed ACAS would 'refer' her to the tribunal after conciliation failed was rejected. She had access to legal advice, could have clarified with ACAS, and the EC certificate clearly stated her responsibility to file. Even if she only learned the truth on 24/2/25, she waited three further days to file.
Claim presented out of time under similar provisions to unfair dismissal. The tribunal applied the same reasoning regarding reasonably practicable test and found the claim was not filed within the permitted time limits.
Facts
The claimant was dismissed on 28 August 2024. She applied for ACAS early conciliation on 25 November 2024 and received her certificate on 6 January 2025, giving her until 6 February 2025 to file her claim. She filed on 27 February 2025, 21 days late. She claimed she had been told by ACAS that they would 'refer' her to the tribunal after conciliation failed and only learned on 24 February 2025 that she had to file herself. She also cited stress, depression and her father's hospitalisation as reasons for the delay.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the claims as out of time. The judge did not accept that ACAS had told the claimant they would refer her case, and even if they had, she had multiple opportunities to clarify the position through her conciliator, solicitors, or the ACAS website. The EC certificate itself made clear her responsibility to file. Her mental health difficulties did not incapacitate her from filing in time. Even if the test were met, she did not file within a reasonable time after learning the truth.
Practical note
Claimants cannot rely on misunderstanding ACAS procedures or general stress following dismissal to excuse missing tribunal time limits, particularly where the EC certificate and publicly available guidance make filing obligations clear and legal advice is accessible.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6006753/2025
- Decision date
- 18 November 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No