Cases8001828/2024

Claimant v Equans E&S Solutions Limited

30 April 2025Before Employment Judge D N JonesScotlandremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have lodged his unfair dismissal claim within the three-month statutory time limit. The claimant failed to research time limits despite being intelligent and capable, waited until the last minute to contact ACAS while on holiday, and could not explain his mistaken belief about the appeal deadline. His personal circumstances, while difficult, did not make it not reasonably practicable to lodge in time.

Direct Discrimination(age)struck out

Tribunal exercised discretion under s.123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010 and found it was not just and equitable to extend time. The claimant unreasonably failed to research his rights, left contact with ACAS until 20 October while abroad, and the discrimination claim appeared weak as it was based on comparison with older colleagues who had not falsified van driving records as he had. The claim was not raised in the internal appeal and was lodged three weeks out of time without adequate explanation.

Facts

The claimant was summarily dismissed on 15 July 2024 for falsifying van driving records. He appealed unsuccessfully on 29 July 2024. He found new employment starting 19 August 2024. Between July and October 2024 he dealt with difficult family circumstances including end-of-life care for his grandmother and guardianship of his grandfather with dementia. He went on a pre-booked family holiday from 12-23 October 2024. He contacted ACAS by email on 20 October while abroad, mistakenly believing he had three months from the appeal outcome. He commenced early conciliation on 30 October and filed his claim on 5 November 2024, three weeks out of time.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed both claims for lack of jurisdiction as they were filed out of time. For unfair dismissal, the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to file in time as the claimant unreasonably failed to research time limits and left it too late to contact ACAS. For age discrimination, the tribunal declined to exercise just and equitable discretion, finding the claimant's ignorance unreasonable, the delay inadequately explained, the claim weak on its merits (comparators had not falsified records), and no discrimination allegation raised in the internal appeal.

Practical note

Claimants must take reasonable steps to research time limits and cannot rely on mistaken beliefs or last-minute holiday contact with ACAS to excuse late filing, particularly where the discrimination claim appears weak and was not raised internally.

Legal authorities cited

Adedeji v University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust [2021] EWCA Civ 23Wall's Meat Co Ltd [1979] ICR 52Kumari v Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust [2022] EAT 132Cygnet Behavioural Health Ltd v Britton [2022] EAT 108Robertson v Bexley Community Centre t/a Leisure Link [2003] IRLR 434Lowri Beck Services Ltd v Brophy [2019] EWCA Civ 2490

Statutes

Equality Act 2010 s.123(1)(b)Employment Rights Act 1996 s.111Equality Act 2010 s.123(1)(a)

Case details

Case number
8001828/2024
Decision date
30 April 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
construction
Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor

Employment details

Service
5 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No