Claim struck out after being filed 15 days late: the risk of relying on a representative
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim was struck out after he presented his claim 15 days after the three-month time limit expired. The tribunal rejected his argument that he relied on advice from his union representative.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #acas-early-conciliation
- #time-limit
- #strike-out
- #union-representative
- #dedman-principle
Key facts
- The claimant presented his claim form 15 days after the three-month limitation period expired.
- The claimant had an Acas early conciliation certificate but mistakenly ticked the wrong box on the ET1 form.
- The claimant withdrew his race discrimination complaint during the hearing.
- The claimant relied on advice from his union representative regarding the timing of his claim.
- The respondent applied to strike out the claim for non-compliance with rules and being out of time.
Timeline
-
Acas early conciliation started
The claimant began early conciliation with Acas.
-
Acas early conciliation ended
The Acas early conciliation process ended, and the claimant received a certificate.
-
Limitation period expired
The three-month time limit for presenting the claim expired.
-
Claim presented
The claimant presented his claim form to the tribunal, 15 days late.
-
Tribunal letter about Acas certificate
The tribunal wrote to the claimant noting the missing Acas certificate number and warning of potential rejection.
-
Respondent's response and strike-out application
The respondent filed a response denying all claims and applying to strike out for lack of Acas certificate and being out of time.
-
Preliminary hearing converted
The tribunal converted the case management hearing to an open preliminary hearing to decide jurisdiction and strike-out issues.
-
Respondent's detailed strike-out application
The respondent sent a detailed application to strike out or for a deposit order.
-
Additional issue added
Acting Regional Employment Judge Russell added the issue of strike-out for no reasonable prospect of success.
-
Preliminary hearing
The hearing took place. The claimant withdrew the race discrimination claim. The tribunal struck out all other claims as out of time.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's remaining complaints (unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, unauthorised deductions) should be struck out because they were presented outside the three-month time limit and whether it was not reasonably practicable for the claimant to present them in time.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out all of the former employee's claims (except the race discrimination complaint, which he withdrew) as they were presented outside the three-month time limit.
The key reason was that the claimant had an Acas early conciliation certificate but mistakenly ticked the wrong box on the ET1 form. He relied on advice from his union representative, but the tribunal found that it was reasonably practicable for him to present the claim in time.
No compensation was awarded as the claims were struck out.
Lessons & takeaways
- The three-month time limit for presenting an employment tribunal claim is strict – even being a few days late can result in the claim being struck out.
- Relying on a representative's advice does not automatically excuse a late claim; the tribunal will consider whether it was reasonably practicable for you to present it in time.
- Double-check your ET1 form carefully, especially the Acas early conciliation section – a simple mistake can have serious consequences.
- If you are unsure about the time limit, it is better to present your claim early and then seek advice, rather than waiting and risking being out of time.
A costly mistake
This case shows how a small error in the tribunal process can have devastating consequences. The former employee presented his unfair dismissal claim just 15 days late, but the tribunal struck it out entirely. The claimant had started Acas early conciliation in time, but when he filled in the ET1 claim form he ticked the wrong box, indicating that his employer had already contacted Acas. In fact, he had a valid Acas certificate, but he did not include the number.
Reliance on a representative
The claimant argued that he relied on advice from his union representative, who told him he had until 22 September 2022 to present his claim. However, the tribunal found that the claimant could have presented the claim in time – he had the certificate, and the delay was due to his own mistake on the form. The tribunal applied the principle that reliance on a representative's advice does not automatically make it not reasonably practicable to present a claim in time.
What the respondent did right
The respondent, T4 Trust, applied early to strike out the claim for being out of time and for non-compliance with the Acas early conciliation rules. They provided detailed submissions and attended the hearing with counsel. Their proactive approach meant the claim was dealt with swiftly, avoiding the cost and uncertainty of a full hearing.
Key takeaway for claimants
This case is a reminder that time limits in employment tribunals are strict. Even a short delay can be fatal to a claim. If you are using a representative, make sure you understand the deadlines yourself and check that your claim form is completed correctly. A simple administrative error can cost you your case.
Similar cases
17-year Tesco shift leader's unfair dismissal claim struck out for failing to comply with tribunal directions
A shift leader with 17 years' service had his unfair dismissal claim struck out after he failed to provide a witness statement, disclosure, or a schedule of loss, and did not engage with the respondent or the tribunal.
Unfair dismissal claim struck out after email submission ignored automatic reply
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim was struck out as out of time after she emailed her ET1 form and failed to read the tribunal's automatic reply stating that claims cannot be accepted by email.
20-year lunchtime supervisor loses constructive dismissal claim filed too late
A lunchtime supervisor with 20 years' service resigned claiming constructive dismissal but filed her claim 117 days late. The tribunal dismissed the claim for lack of jurisdiction and struck out discrimination claims as having no reasonable prospect of success.
Parkinson's and technical issues: tribunal extends time for unfair dismissal claim
A university academic with Parkinson's disease was allowed to pursue her unfair dismissal claim 10 days late after the tribunal found it was not reasonably practicable to file on time due to her disability and IT problems.