19-year employee's claims dismissed as out of time despite disabilities
A bureau operator with 19 years' service had his claims for breach of contract and discrimination thrown out because they were lodged over four years after his dismissal.
1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a bureau operator from December 1999 until dismissal on 8 August 2018.
- The claimant was dismissed following a complaint by Mr Luke Mercer on 31 May 2018.
- The claimant's appeal against dismissal was refused on 3 December 2018.
- The claimant had previously brought two employment tribunal claims, both dismissed.
- This claim was received on 19 March 2023, over four years after the effective date of termination.
- The claimant has autism, dyslexia and ADHD.
Timeline
-
Employment started
The claimant commenced employment with a predecessor to the respondent as a bureau operator.
-
Alleged discrimination incident
The claimant alleges he was subjected to bullying, victimisation and discrimination by Mr Luke Mercer.
-
Dismissal
The claimant was dismissed following Mr Mercer's complaint.
-
First claim lodged
The claimant lodged a claim for unfair dismissal.
-
Appeal refused
The claimant's appeal against dismissal was refused, and he was told no further investigation of grievances would occur.
-
First claim dismissed
The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed as out of time.
-
Second claim lodged
The claimant lodged a claim for disability discrimination.
-
Second claim dismissed
The disability discrimination claim was dismissed as an abuse of process.
-
Early conciliation started
Early conciliation at ACAS occurred between 16 and 23 February 2023.
-
This claim lodged
The claimant lodged this claim for breach of contract, victimisation, breach of duty of care, sexual discrimination and Human Rights Act claims.
-
Preliminary hearing
A preliminary hearing was held to determine whether the claims were presented in time.
-
Judgment issued
The tribunal dismissed all claims as out of time.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's claims for breach of contract and discrimination were presented within the applicable time limits, and if not, whether time should be extended.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims as out of time.
- The breach of contract claims were not presented within the three-month time limit. Although the tribunal accepted it was not reasonably practicable for the claimant to do so earlier, he did not bring the claims within a further reasonable period after the obstacle ceased.
- The discrimination claims were also out of time. The tribunal considered whether it would be just and equitable to extend time but concluded it would not, given the lengthy delay and the fact that the claimant had already brought two earlier claims arising from the same facts.
- No compensation was awarded as all claims were dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employment tribunal claims must usually be brought within three months of the act complained of; delays of years are almost always fatal.
- Even if you have a disability that makes it harder to bring a claim, you must act promptly once the barrier is removed.
- Bringing multiple claims based on the same events can lead to later claims being struck out as an abuse of process.
- Early conciliation with ACAS does not reset the clock for time limits that have already expired.
A case of missed deadlines
This case shows how strict employment tribunal time limits are, even for claimants with disabilities. The claimant, a bureau operator with 19 years' service, was dismissed in August 2018 after a colleague complained about him. He believed he had been bullied and discriminated against, but his first claim for unfair dismissal was dismissed as out of time in 2019. A second claim for disability discrimination was struck out as an abuse of process in 2021.
Despite these setbacks, the claimant lodged a third set of claims in March 2023 — more than four years after his dismissal. He argued that his autism, dyslexia and ADHD made it difficult for him to understand the process and that he had been pursuing appeals. The tribunal accepted that it was not reasonably practicable for him to bring the breach of contract claims earlier, but said he still had to act within a reasonable time once the obstacle was removed. By waiting until 2023, he had failed to do so.
What the respondent did right
The respondent, Thales DIS UK Limited, successfully argued that the claims were far too late and that the same issues had already been litigated. The tribunal agreed, noting that the claimant had received legal advice and representation in his earlier claims. The fact that the claimant had already brought two claims based on the same events meant that the third claim was an abuse of process.
What this means for similar claims
This case is a reminder that time limits in employment tribunals are not flexible. Even if you have a disability or are pursuing appeals, you must bring your claim within three months of the dismissal or discriminatory act — or as soon as reasonably practicable afterwards. If you miss that window, you may lose your right to claim altogether, no matter how strong your case might be on the facts.
Similar cases
Harassment claim against individual manager allowed to proceed late
A former employee's harassment and victimisation claims against her employer were deemed in time if there was conduct over a period, but time was extended for a harassment claim against the individual manager.
Disability discrimination claims dismissed as out of time: a reminder on tribunal deadlines
A former optician employee's disability discrimination claims were dismissed because they were filed too late. The tribunal refused to extend the time limit, finding it was not just and equitable to do so.
Former employee awarded notice pay after tribunal extends time for late claim
A tribunal extended time for an unfair dismissal claim filed 11 days late, but struck it out for lack of merit. The claimant succeeded only on a breach of contract claim for notice pay, receiving £948.78.
Sex discrimination amendment refused: comparing safety concerns with colleague
A former employee's attempt to add a sex discrimination claim based on how her safety concerns were handled compared to a colleague's was refused by the tribunal as out of time and lacking merit.