Taxi driver's unfair dismissal and discrimination claims dismissed as out of time
A taxi driver who waited over six months to bring his claim after Uber deactivated his account has had his case thrown out by the Nottingham tribunal for being well outside the three-month time limit.
2 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
- #out-of-time
- #unfair-dismissal
- #age-discrimination
- #race-discrimination
- #religion-or-belief-discrimination
- #taxi-driver
- #driver-deactivation
Key facts
- The claimant worked as a taxi driver for Uber from 1 January 2020 until 30 September 2022.
- His Uber account was deactivated on 30 September 2022 due to multiple rider complaints about his driving.
- The claimant did not contact ACAS until 13 February 2023, over six weeks after the time limit expired.
- The claimant presented his claim to the tribunal on 30 March 2023, well outside the three-month time limit.
- The claimant provided no specific facts to support his discrimination claims, only a general feeling.
Timeline
-
Employment start
The claimant began working as a taxi driver for Uber.
-
Account placed on hold
The claimant's Uber account was placed on hold due to complaints that he appeared to fall asleep while driving.
-
Account deactivated
Uber deactivated the claimant's account and terminated the driver terms, citing multiple rider complaints.
-
Claimant disputes allegations
The claimant emailed Uber disputing the allegations but made no mention of discrimination.
-
First attempt to instruct solicitors
The claimant tried to instruct solicitors but was unsuccessful.
-
Final call with Uber
The claimant spoke with Uber support and was told the decision was final.
-
Uber confirms final decision
Uber emailed the claimant confirming the decision was final.
-
Second attempt to instruct solicitors
The claimant again tried to instruct solicitors without success.
-
ACAS early conciliation started
The claimant notified ACAS of his potential claim, six weeks after the time limit expired.
-
ACAS certificate issued
ACAS issued the early conciliation certificate.
-
Claim presented to tribunal
The claimant presented his claim for unfair dismissal and discrimination.
The legal issue
Whether the tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the driver's unfair dismissal and discrimination claims, which were presented over six months after his dismissal, well outside the three-month time limit.
The outcome
The tribunal decided it had no jurisdiction to hear the claims because they were presented out of time.
- The driver's account was deactivated on 30 September 2022, but he did not contact ACAS until 13 February 2023 – over six weeks after the time limit expired.
- He presented his claim on 30 March 2023, more than three months late.
- For unfair dismissal, the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for him to have presented his claim on time; he had tried to instruct solicitors but gave no explanation for the long delay.
- For the discrimination claims, the tribunal found it would not be just and equitable to extend time, noting the driver provided no specific facts to support his allegations of race, religion or belief, or age discrimination.
Lessons & takeaways
- The time limit for most employment claims is three months from the date of dismissal or the act complained of – missing it by even a few weeks can be fatal.
- Early conciliation with ACAS must be started within the three-month window; waiting until after the deadline will not usually save a claim.
- Discrimination claims require specific facts linking the treatment to a protected characteristic – a general feeling of unfairness is not enough.
- Attempting to instruct solicitors does not automatically excuse a delay; you must show it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time.
- If you want to challenge a dismissal, act promptly – the longer you wait, the harder it becomes to persuade a tribunal to hear your case.
A claim that ran out of road
This case shows how strictly employment tribunals apply time limits, even when a claimant feels strongly that they have been treated unfairly. The driver, who had worked for Uber for nearly three years, had his account deactivated after multiple rider complaints about his driving. He disputed the allegations but did not take formal steps to bring a claim until months later.
By the time he contacted ACAS – the first required step in most employment claims – the three-month window had already closed. He then waited another six weeks before presenting his claim to the tribunal. The result was that the tribunal never considered the merits of his case.
What went wrong
The driver argued that he had tried to instruct solicitors on two occasions, but the tribunal noted that these attempts were brief and did not explain the long gaps in between. He also gave no reason for the delay between his final call with Uber in early October 2022 and his first attempt to get legal help in January 2023. The tribunal found that it was reasonably practicable for him to have presented his unfair dismissal claim on time – he simply did not act quickly enough.
On the discrimination claims, the driver faced an additional hurdle. He alleged that his dismissal was due to his race, religion or belief, and age, but he provided no specific facts to support this – only a general feeling. The tribunal had already warned him at an earlier hearing that this was not enough. Without any evidence linking his treatment to a protected characteristic, extending time would not have been just and equitable.
What this means for others
Time limits are unforgiving in employment law. The clock starts ticking from the date of dismissal or the discriminatory act, not from when you finally decide to take action. If you are considering a claim, the first step is to contact ACAS within the three-month period – even if you are still gathering evidence or seeking legal advice. Waiting to see if you can find a solicitor is not a valid excuse for missing the deadline.
For discrimination claims, the tribunal will expect you to point to specific facts – comments, patterns of behaviour, or comparisons with others – that suggest a protected characteristic played a part. A hunch, however strongly felt, will not be enough to keep your claim alive.
Similar cases
Process and Technical Manager's out-of-time claim dismissed by tribunal
A tribunal dismissed a claim for unfair dismissal and discrimination after the claimant presented his case one day late and failed to attend hearings or provide any explanation for the delay.
Professional footballer's unfair dismissal claim out of time but discrimination claims allowed to proceed
A tribunal ruled that a QPR footballer's unfair dismissal claim was brought too late, but allowed his race and harassment claims against the club, manager John Yems and Crawley Town to go forward due to his severe depression.
Race discrimination and wage claim dismissed as out of time: no extension granted
A former employee's claims for race discrimination and unlawful deduction of wages were dismissed because they were brought too late. The tribunal also refused a reconsideration application.
Former employee's discrimination claims dismissed for being out of time
A former employee's claims of age and race discrimination against Hydrosphere UK Ltd were dismissed as out of time, and his unfair dismissal claim was struck out for lack of service.