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.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #age-discrimination
- #race-discrimination
- #unfair-dismissal
- #out-of-time
- #strike-out
- #reconsideration-dismissed
Key facts
- The claimant was employed for less than two years.
- The unfair dismissal claim was struck out for lack of qualifying service.
- The age and race discrimination claims were presented out of time.
- The claimant's application for reconsideration was dismissed.
Timeline
-
Age discrimination incident
Two WhatsApp messages in March and April 2021 allegedly contained age discrimination.
-
Race discrimination incident
An incident in November or December 2021 allegedly involved race discrimination.
-
Claim form submitted
The claimant submitted his claim form to the tribunal.
-
Unfair dismissal struck out
Employment Judge Livesey struck out the unfair dismissal claim due to insufficient service.
-
Discrimination claims dismissed
Employment Judge Cadney dismissed the age and race discrimination claims as out of time.
-
Application for reconsideration
The claimant submitted an application for reconsideration, treated as an appeal.
-
Reconsideration dismissed
Employment Judge Cadney dismissed the reconsideration application.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether to extend the time limit for discrimination claims that were filed months after the alleged incidents, and whether an unfair dismissal claim could proceed despite the employee having less than two years' service.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the former employee had not completed two years' continuous service, which is a legal requirement for bringing such a claim.
The age and race discrimination claims were dismissed as out of time. The alleged incidents occurred in March/April 2021 (age) and November/December 2021 (race), but the claim was not submitted until September 2022. The tribunal found no just and equitable reason to extend the time limit.
No compensation was awarded as all claims were dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- You generally need at least two years' continuous service to bring an unfair dismissal claim in England and Wales.
- Discrimination claims must be brought within three months of the alleged incident – delays of several months are almost always fatal.
- If you fear victimisation while still employed, you can still submit a claim to the tribunal to protect your time limit, then ask for a stay.
- Tribunals will not extend time just because you were 'quiet and timid' or reluctant to complain – you must act promptly.
- An application for reconsideration is not an appeal; appeals go to the Employment Appeal Tribunal and must be lodged within strict time limits.
A case of missed deadlines
This case illustrates how strictly employment tribunals enforce time limits. The former employee alleged age discrimination based on two WhatsApp messages in March and April 2021, and race discrimination from an incident in November or December 2021. He did not submit his claim until September 2022 – over a year after the age-related comments and around nine months after the race incident.
By then, the three-month time limit for bringing discrimination claims had long passed. The tribunal has discretion to extend time if it is 'just and equitable', but the employee's reasons – including that he was 'quiet and timid' and feared victimisation – were not enough to persuade the judge.
The unfair dismissal hurdle
Separately, the employee's unfair dismissal claim was struck out at an early stage because he had worked for Hydrosphere UK Ltd for less than two years. Under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, most employees need two years' continuous service to bring an unfair dismissal claim. There are exceptions (e.g. automatically unfair reasons like whistleblowing), but none applied here.
What the losing side could have done differently
The employee could have preserved his position by lodging a protective claim within three months of each alleged incident, even if he was still working for the company. He could then have asked the tribunal to stay (pause) proceedings while he tried to resolve matters internally. Waiting until after leaving employment meant the deadlines had passed.
Why this matters
For anyone considering a tribunal claim, the key lesson is: act quickly. Time limits for discrimination are short and strictly applied. And for unfair dismissal, check your length of service before assuming you have a claim. The tribunal's role is not to rescue claims that have been brought too late, no matter how strong the underlying allegations might be.
Similar cases
Former employee loses unfair dismissal and discrimination claims after failing to pursue them
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed for lack of continuity of employment, and his race discrimination claim was thrown out as out of time. Other claims were struck out for failing to actively pursue them.
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.
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.
Firefighter's unfair dismissal and race claims struck out as too late
A firefighter who waited over a year to bring unfair dismissal and race discrimination claims after his misconduct dismissal had his case struck out by the tribunal as out of time.