Cases6007503/2025

Claimant v Tyne North Training Limited

18 November 2025Before Employment Judge MossNewcastlein person

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

The tribunal found the claim was presented out of time and that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented it within the primary time limit. The claimant had reviewed the form beforehand, considered it straightforward, and chose to leave it until the final day. Although he experienced IT difficulties on 02 March 2025, the tribunal held that it was reasonable to expect him to have submitted the claim earlier in the three-month period, particularly as he had instructed solicitors and felt able to handle the claim himself.

Facts

The claimant was employed from June 2006 until 30 September 2024, with a dispute over whether his fixed-term contract had been extended. He contacted ACAS on 22 December 2024 and received his certificate on 02 February 2025. The primary time limit for presenting his unfair dismissal claim was 02 March 2025. The claimant reviewed the claim form beforehand and considered it straightforward, but left completion until the final day. On 02 March 2025, he was unable to access his new laptop due to a forgotten iCloud password, despite attempting throughout the day and night. He became highly anxious and distressed. He successfully submitted the claim on 04 March 2025 after his computer restarted without requiring the password. The claimant had instructed solicitors intermittently but chose to handle the claim presentation himself. He was diagnosed with autism and ADHD in May 2025.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim as out of time. The judge found that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented the claim within the primary time limit. Although the claimant experienced genuine IT difficulties and distress on 02 March 2025, he had made a conscious decision to leave completion until the final day despite having reviewed the form earlier and finding it straightforward. The medical evidence of autism and ADHD did not establish that these conditions prevented him from completing the task earlier. While the claim was presented within a reasonable period after the deadline (two days later), this could not rescue it where it was reasonably practicable to present on time.

Practical note

Leaving presentation of a tribunal claim until the last day of the limitation period carries substantial risk, and unexpected technical difficulties on the final day will not render it 'not reasonably practicable' to present on time where the claimant could have acted earlier.

Legal authorities cited

Asda Stores Ltd v Kauser [2007] EAT 0165Palmer and Saunders v Southend-on-Sea BC [1984] 1 All ER 945Wall's Meat Co v Khan [1978] IRLR 499London Underground Ltd v Noel [1999] IRLR 621Dedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances [1974] 1 All ER 520Consignia plc v Sealy [2002] EWCA Civ 878Cross v NHS Somerset Clinical Commissioning Group [2024] EAT 20Lowri Beck Services Ltd v Brophy [2019] EWCA Civ 2490Initial Electronic Security Systems Ltd v Avdic [2005] IRLR 671Schultz v Esso Petroleum Ltd [1999] IRLR 388

Statutes

Employment Rights Act 1996 s.111

Case details

Case number
6007503/2025
Decision date
18 November 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
education
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Service
18 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No