Claimant v Delta Slaley Hall Co Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as it was not reasonably practicable for the claim to be presented within the time limit. Claimant was aware of technical difficulties with the portal at a time when he could have submitted a compliant form. He failed to provide sufficient information in the initial submission and did not resubmit within a reasonable period after rejection on 2 April 2024.
Claim for automatic unfair dismissal under s103A ERA dismissed for lack of jurisdiction on time limit grounds. Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present the claim in time, and even if not, the claim was not presented within a further reasonable period after the initial rejection.
Claim for detriments under s47B ERA dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The claim was presented on 15 April 2024, outside the time limit which expired on 12 April 2024. Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present the claim in time and that the resubmission was not made within a reasonable period.
Withdrawn by claimant at the preliminary hearing. The breach of contract claim related to a tax rebate which the claimant thought was unusual.
Facts
Claimant was employed as a sous chef from September to November 2023. He alleged he made protected disclosures about drug-taking by staff, unsafe food practices, and health and safety failures including a hot oil incident. He was dismissed on 21 November 2023 during his probationary period, with the respondent citing a breakdown in working relationships. The claimant attempted to submit his tribunal claim on the last day of the time limit (26 March 2024) but experienced technical difficulties uploading his particulars of claim document. The claim was rejected as not being in proper form. He resubmitted on 15 April 2024, which was outside the extended time limit.
Decision
The tribunal found it had no jurisdiction to hear the claims as they were presented outside the time limit and it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented them in time. The claimant could have summarised his claim in the text box provided when he encountered technical difficulties. Even if it was not reasonably practicable, the delay between rejection on 2 April and resubmission on 15 April was not a reasonable further period. All claims were dismissed.
Practical note
Technical difficulties with the tribunal's online portal on the last day of a time limit will not save a claim from being time-barred where the claimant could have used alternative means (such as the text box provided) to submit a compliant form, and any delay in resubmission after rejection must be objectively reasonable.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2500783/2024
- Decision date
- 21 February 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- hospitality
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Sous Chef
- Service
- 2 months
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No