Claimant v Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Trust
Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant resigned on 7 July 2023 with employment terminating on 18 July 2023. The claim was filed on 12 June 2024, nearly 8 months after the 17 October 2023 deadline. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have filed in time, as she was aware of her right to file a claim from at least 2 October 2023, could have researched time limits, and provided no adequate explanation for the delay. The tribunal therefore had no jurisdiction to hear the claim.
The alleged age discrimination by the second respondent occurred between 2020 and 18 July 2023. The claim should have been filed by 17 October 2023 but was filed on 12 June 2024, 8 months late. Despite receiving legal advice between March and April 2024 that the claim was out of time, the claimant delayed a further 3.5 weeks after the grievance appeal outcome to file. The tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time, particularly given the lack of explanation for delays after receiving legal advice, and dismissed the claim for lack of jurisdiction.
Facts
The claimant was a secretary employed by the NHS Trust from October 2015 to July 2023. She resigned on 7 July 2023, with employment ending on 18 July 2023. She raised informal complaints about age discrimination with HR on 28 September 2023 and a formal grievance on 1 December 2023. She obtained legal advice between 31 March and 24 April 2024. Early conciliation with the first respondent occurred 2-7 May 2024 and with the second respondent 20-24 May 2024. The claim was filed on 12 June 2024, approximately 8 months after the time limit expired on 17 October 2023.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed both claims for lack of jurisdiction due to being out of time. For unfair dismissal, it found it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have filed in time, as she was aware of her right to claim from October 2023 and could have researched time limits. For age discrimination, the tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time, particularly given the unexplained delays after receiving legal advice and after early conciliation ended.
Practical note
Claimants must adhere to strict time limits even when pursuing internal grievance processes, and ignorance of time limits is not an acceptable excuse where the claimant is aware of their right to bring a claim and capable of researching the procedural requirements.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3305899/2024
- Decision date
- 14 February 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Secretary
- Service
- 8 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No