Claimant v SBFM Group Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim arose from TUPE transfer on 1 September 2022. Tribunal found it was not reasonably practicable to submit in time (claimant ignorant of right until employment ended December 2023), but claim not submitted within reasonable further period - claimant received ACAS certificate 8 March 2024 but submitted claim 9 April 2024, one day after one-month extension expired. Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Claim out of time - EDT 8 December 2023, ACAS certificate 8 March 2024, claim submitted 9 April 2024 (one day late). Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to submit in time - claimant had union advice, no障礙 preventing submission. Time limit could not be extended. Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Notice pay claim out of time - EDT 8 December 2023, ACAS certificate 8 March 2024, claim submitted 9 April 2024 (one day late). Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to submit in time. Time limit could not be extended. Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Claim out of time - EDT 8 December 2023, ACAS certificate 8 March 2024, claim submitted 9 April 2024 (one day late). Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to submit in time. Time limit could not be extended. Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Claimant alleged non-payment since 1 September 2022. Tribunal treated last deduction date as 8 December 2023 (termination date). Claim submitted 9 April 2024 (one day late). Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to submit in time. Time limit could not be extended. Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Facts
Claimant's employment transferred from second respondent to first respondent on 1 September 2022 under TUPE. First respondent initially denied employment but conceded in December 2024. Claimant's employment ended 8 December 2023 when gym access was revoked. Claimant received union advice in January 2024, contacted ACAS 22 February 2024, received certificate 8 March 2024, and submitted claim 9 April 2024 - one day late.
Decision
All claims dismissed as out of time. TUPE consultation claim not submitted within reasonable further period after claimant became aware of rights. Dismissal-related claims were one day late and tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to submit in time - claimant had union advice and no obstacle preventing timely submission.
Practical note
Missing an employment tribunal time limit by even one day can be fatal to a claim where the tribunal finds it was reasonably practicable to submit in time, especially where the claimant had access to professional advice.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2600705/2024
- Decision date
- 13 March 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- cleaner (gym facility)
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep