Prison officer's unfair dismissal claim fails after email to union goes to junk folder
A prison officer with 14 years' service had his unfair dismissal claim rejected as out of time after a union email was lost in a junk folder, leaving him 10 days late in filing.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #gross-misconduct
- #out-of-time
- #trade-union-representation
- #acas-early-conciliation
- #junk-email
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a prison officer from 1 March 2008 until his dismissal on 18 July 2022.
- The claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct following a disciplinary hearing and appeal.
- The normal time limit for presenting an unfair dismissal claim was 29 October 2022.
- The claimant presented his claim on 8 November 2022, 10 days late.
- The claimant's union representative failed to forward documents due to an email going into a junk folder.
- The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented his claim in time.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment as a prison officer.
-
Dismissal
Claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct following a disciplinary hearing and appeal.
-
Union representative passed papers
The local POA representative, who was winding down due to surgery, passed papers to the branch secretary via email, but the email went into the junk folder.
-
Acas early conciliation started
Claimant applied to Acas for early conciliation.
-
Acas certificate issued
Acas early conciliation certificate was issued and emailed to the claimant.
-
Claimant chased union
Claimant emailed branch secretary for progress, but received no reply.
-
Claimant chased union again
Claimant again emailed branch secretary and called, but got no response.
-
Time limit expired
The normal time limit for presenting the claim expired.
-
Claim presented
Claimant submitted the ET1 form after being advised by solicitors.
-
Preliminary hearing
Employment Judge O'Neill held a preliminary hearing to consider whether the claim was presented in time.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented his unfair dismissal claim within the normal time limits, and if not, whether the claim was presented within a reasonable further period.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim as out of time.
- The normal time limit expired on 29 October 2022, but the claim was not presented until 8 November 2022.
- The claimant relied on his union representative's failure to forward documents due to an email going into a junk folder.
- The tribunal held that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented his claim in time, as he could have taken steps to chase the union earlier or sought independent advice.
- No compensation was awarded as the claim was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Lessons & takeaways
- Do not rely solely on a union representative to file your claim; follow up regularly and ensure documents are received.
- If you are unsure about time limits, seek independent legal advice early, especially if your representative is unwell or unavailable.
- Keep copies of all correspondence with your representative and be proactive in chasing progress, particularly as deadlines approach.
- Time limits for unfair dismissal claims are strict; even a delay of a few days can be fatal to your claim.
- Check your junk email folder regularly, especially if you are expecting important documents from your representative.
When a union's email goes astray
This case shows how a seemingly small administrative error — an email landing in a junk folder — can derail an otherwise potentially strong unfair dismissal claim. The claimant, a prison officer with 14 years' service, was dismissed for gross misconduct in July 2022. He relied on his union, the POA, to handle his claim. But when the local representative, who was winding down due to upcoming surgery, passed the papers to the branch secretary by email, the message was never seen. It had been filtered into the junk folder.
By the time the claimant realised nothing was happening, the deadline had passed. He had chased the union twice in October, but received no reply. He eventually sought solicitors and filed his claim on 8 November 2022 — just 10 days late. The tribunal, however, found that it was reasonably practicable for him to have filed on time. The judge noted that the claimant could have taken more proactive steps, such as contacting the union earlier or seeking independent advice when his emails went unanswered.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant's main error was passive reliance on his union. While it is understandable to trust a representative, the law places the ultimate responsibility on the individual. The tribunal emphasised that the claimant was aware of the time limit and had the capacity to act. He could have phoned the branch secretary directly, visited the union office, or instructed a solicitor as soon as he sensed delay. Waiting until after the deadline to seek help was not enough.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a stark reminder that employment tribunal time limits are strictly applied. The 'reasonably practicable' test is a high hurdle: it is not enough to show that your representative made a mistake. You must show that it was not possible for you to file on time despite taking reasonable steps. For anyone considering a claim, the lesson is clear: keep control of your own case, chase progress relentlessly, and never assume that someone else will meet the deadline for you.
Similar cases
Social worker's unfair dismissal claim thrown out for being over a year late
A social worker who waited over a year to bring an unfair dismissal claim after being summarily dismissed for gross misconduct had her case struck out as out of time. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for her to have claimed within the three-month limit.
Constructive dismissal claim dismissed as nine months out of time
A former employee's claims of automatic constructive unfair dismissal and sexual orientation harassment were struck out after he presented his claim nine months late, despite having initially filed on time but without an ACAS certificate.
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.
Claim dismissed after CAB missed tribunal deadline: time limits are strict
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim was thrown out because he relied on the Citizens Advice Bureau to submit his claim, but the three-month deadline had already passed.