EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS
Claim in time and effective date of termination
Extension of time: just and equitable
1. The Claimant’s unfair dismissal and discrimination claims were struck out, as being out of time.
2. She was summarily dismissed on 06.07.11. That information was sent to the Claimant’s solicitor by e-mail that day. She informed the Claimant on the next day and advised her to appeal. A letter to the Claimant confirming the dismissal was not seen by her until 08.07. The Employment Judge held that the effective date of termination was 07.07. Held that the EJ had not erred in law; the principle in Gisda Cyf v Barrett ([2010] ICR 1475) that dismissal is not effective until the employee knows of it or has had a reasonable opportunity to do so did not operate so as to exclude communication of the dismissal to the employee by a third party – in this case her instructed solicitor.
3. It was accepted on appeal that the last act of discrimination was more than 3 months before the claim was presented; the issue was whether the EJ had erred in law in declining to extend time on the just and equitable basis. Held that the EJ had erred in law in not taking into account the principle in Virdi ([2007] IRLR 24) that the sins of the Claimant’s solicitor in this context are not to be visited on the Claimant. Virdi had not been cited to her; but the point was not said not to have been taken. The delay was attributable to the solicitor; a finding that time should be extended was substituted.
Burke QC J
[2013] UKEAT 0313 – 12 – 2011)
Bailii
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 26 November 2021; Ref: scu.518542