Long-serving finance accountant dismissed for sickness absence: claim out of time
A finance accountant with 21 years' service was dismissed on capability grounds due to long-term sickness. Her unfair dismissal claim was rejected as out of time, and her discrimination claims were dismissed on the merits.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- Claimant was employed as a Finance Accountant from 29 March 1999 until 22 October 2020.
- She was dismissed on capability grounds due to long-term sickness absence.
- Her son, Mr Squires, represented her and submitted the ET1 on 16 March 2021.
- The unfair dismissal claim was out of time; the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to bring it in time.
- The discrimination claims were allowed to proceed on a just and equitable basis but were ultimately dismissed.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began working for the Respondent as a Financial Technician.
-
Promotion
Claimant was promoted to Finance Accountant.
-
Sickness absence began
Claimant went off sick with chest infections, viral infections, anxiety and depression.
-
Stage 2 Sickness Review
Claimant was dismissed on capability grounds; outcome communicated by letter on 5 August 2020.
-
Grievance raised
Mr Squires raised a grievance on claimant's behalf and notified ACAS of intention to bring tribunal claim.
-
ACAS notified
Mr Squires notified ACAS; certificate issued on 25 September 2020.
-
Effective date of termination
Claimant's employment ended after 12 weeks' notice.
-
ET1 submitted
Mr Squires submitted the claim to the Employment Tribunal.
-
Preliminary hearing on time limits
Employment Judge L Burge heard evidence and submissions on time limits.
-
Final hearing judgment
Employment Judge Fowell dismissed all discrimination claims.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the unfair dismissal claim was presented within the three-month time limit and, if not, whether it was reasonably practicable to do so. It also considered whether it was just and equitable to extend time for the age and disability discrimination claims.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. The unfair dismissal claim was out of time because the claimant's representative (her son) had notified ACAS within time but waited until after the grievance and appeal process to submit the claim, which was not a reasonable excuse. The discrimination claims were allowed to proceed out of time but were dismissed because the evidence did not show that the dismissal or any other treatment was because of age or disability.
Lessons & takeaways
- Notify ACAS and submit your ET1 within three months of dismissal, even if internal grievances or appeals are ongoing.
- A representative's busy schedule or illness may not be enough to extend the time limit if the claim could have been filed earlier.
- Long service does not automatically make a capability dismissal unfair if the employer follows a proper process.
- To succeed in a discrimination claim, you need evidence linking the treatment to a protected characteristic, not just a feeling of unfairness.
A long career ended by illness
The claimant had worked for the London Borough of Bexley for 21 years, rising from Financial Technician to Finance Accountant. In June 2019 she went off sick with chest infections, anxiety and depression. After a year of absence, the council dismissed her on capability grounds in July 2020. Her son, who represented her, immediately raised a grievance and notified ACAS. But he did not submit the tribunal claim until March 2021, after the grievance and appeal had been exhausted.
Why the time limit mattered
The tribunal ruled that the unfair dismissal claim was out of time. The key moment was the effective date of termination in October 2020. The claimant's son had already contacted ACAS in August 2020, so he knew about the need to act. The tribunal accepted that the claimant herself was too ill to handle the claim, but her son was capable and had time to submit the ET1 before the deadline. His busy work schedule and illness in December 2020 were not enough to make it 'not reasonably practicable' to file on time.
Discrimination claims dismissed on the facts
The discrimination claims were allowed to proceed out of time, but they failed on the evidence. The tribunal found no link between the dismissal and the claimant's age or disability. The council had followed its sickness absence procedure, offered support, and considered alternatives before deciding to dismiss. The claimant's long service was taken into account, but the employer's decision was within the range of reasonable responses.
What this means for similar cases
This case is a reminder that time limits are strict. Even if you have a strong case, missing the deadline can be fatal. Internal processes like grievances do not pause the clock. If you are relying on a representative, make sure they understand the urgency. For capability dismissals, employers can fairly dismiss if the employee is unlikely to return in a reasonable time, provided they follow a fair process and consider reasonable adjustments for disability.
Similar cases
Sales assistant with chronic kidney disease loses disability discrimination claim over furlough placement
A former nurse turned sales assistant who was placed on furlough during the pandemic due to shielding advice has lost her disability and age discrimination claims against Irvings Butchers Limited.
Senior nurse's unfair dismissal claim struck out after being filed over four years late
A tribunal struck out a senior nurse's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims because she filed them more than four years after the deadline, despite knowing the time limits.
Strike-out and deposit order: a mixed outcome for former employee with osteoarthritis
A former employee with osteoarthritis faced strike-out of one harassment claim but was allowed to proceed with others, including unfair dismissal and disability discrimination, after a preliminary hearing.
Line Driver's discrimination claims dismissed as out of time after redundancy
An employment tribunal dismissed all discrimination claims brought by a part-time Line Driver with 4 years' service against Manheim Limited, finding they were brought too late and lacked merit. The unfair dismissal claim was withdrawn.