Claimant v 1st Choice Fitted Bedrooms Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Claimant lacked the required 2 years continuous employment for a standard unfair dismissal complaint. Judge at case management hearing determined there were no circumstances giving rise to an automatic unfair dismissal complaint and dismissed this complaint.
Claim dismissed as presented out of time. Tribunal held it was not just and equitable to extend time. Claimant dismissed for being in possession of cannabis at work; alleged 'brain fog' caused her to forget it was in her pocket. Tribunal found little merit in the claim as currently formulated.
Claim dismissed as presented out of time. Complaint related to: not giving notice of disciplinary hearing (one minute's notice), not allowing companion, predetermining outcome. Tribunal found claim 'almost bound to fail on the PCP point alone' because claimant's complaint was respondent did not apply its policies to her, not that it had a policy of not allowing accompaniment.
Facts
Claimant was employed for 6 months from May to November 2023. She was dismissed on 2 November 2023 for being in possession of cannabis at work. She had disabilities including ME and anxiety. She commenced early conciliation on 4 January 2024 and presented her claim on 26 March 2024, 11 days out of time. The claimant argued her medical conditions prevented timely presentation as she was focused on settling a previous tribunal claim against a former employer until around 20 March 2024.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the claim as out of time, holding it was not just and equitable to extend the time limit. The judge rejected the claimant's medical explanation for delay, noting she had successfully engaged in other litigation and administrative processes during the relevant period. The judge found the claims had little merit, the respondent would suffer prejudice from further case management and potential claim amendments, and the claimant had attempted to reformulate her complaints at the hearing in ways not previously raised.
Practical note
Even a short delay of 11 days can be fatal to a discrimination claim where the claimant cannot provide convincing medical or other evidence for the delay, particularly where the claims lack merit and would require significant further case management if allowed to proceed.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2401901/2024
- Decision date
- 13 March 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- retail
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Service
- 6 months
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No