Claimant v Greater Glasgow Health Board
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim was dismissed as time-barred. The tribunal found the claim was filed approximately seven months out of time and it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have filed in time. The delay was due to a breakdown in communication between the claimant and his union representative, which did not constitute a valid excuse.
Claim dismissed as time-barred. The tribunal declined to extend time on a just and equitable basis. The seven-month delay was extreme, the claimant's reasons for delay were inadequate, and allowing the claim would cause significant prejudice to the respondent given the age of the allegations (dating back to 2021) and likely difficulties with witness availability and evidence cogency.
Claim dismissed as time-barred. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been submitted in time. Even if not, the claim was not submitted within a reasonable time after the expiry of the original time limit.
Claim dismissed as time-barred on the same basis as the unlawful deduction of wages claim. The claimant alleged he was due more holiday pay than was paid following termination, but failed to file the claim within the statutory time limit or a reasonable time thereafter.
Facts
The claimant worked as a hospital porter for the respondent from July 2003 to September 2023. He was dismissed on capability grounds following long-term absence due to PTSD arising from a car accident and Covid shielding. He was represented by Unite the Union during the dismissal process and his appeal. The claimant alleges the union representative agreed to submit an Employment Tribunal claim on his behalf following early conciliation in October-November 2023, but this was not done. The claimant only discovered in May 2024 that the union would not represent him and filed his claim himself in August 2024, approximately seven months out of time.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all claims as time-barred. For the unfair dismissal, wages and holiday pay claims, the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to file in time and the claim was not filed within a reasonable period thereafter. For the disability discrimination claim, the tribunal declined to extend time on a just and equitable basis, finding the seven-month delay was extreme, the reasons inadequate, and the prejudice to the respondent in defending allegations dating back to 2021 was substantial.
Practical note
A breakdown in communication with a trade union representative does not excuse a seven-month delay in filing tribunal proceedings, particularly where the claimant had months to take action after discovering the union would not assist him.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 4106421/2024
- Decision date
- 13 March 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Employment details
- Role
- hospital porter
- Service
- 20 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No