Unfair dismissal claim thrown out for being two months late
A former security guard's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed after he presented it two months after the deadline. The tribunal ruled it was reasonably practicable for him to have filed on time despite his mental health issues and lack of legal knowledge.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant's employment ended on 23 May 2022.
- The claimant contacted ACAS on 22 August 2022, the last day of the normal three-month time limit.
- ACAS issued its certificate on 3 October 2022, extending the deadline to 3 November 2022.
- The claimant presented his claim on 6 January 2023, about two months after the extended deadline.
- The claimant gave reasons for delay: mental health issues and lack of knowledge of time limits.
- The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to present his claim in time and refused to extend time.
Timeline
-
Employment terminated
The claimant's employment with the respondent ended.
-
Contacted ACAS
The claimant and his sister-in-law contacted ACAS on the last day of the normal three-month time limit.
-
ACAS certificate issued
ACAS issued its early conciliation certificate, extending the deadline to 3 November 2022.
-
Claim presented
The claimant presented his unfair dismissal claim, about two months after the extended deadline.
-
Preliminary hearing
The tribunal heard the preliminary issue of whether the claim was presented in time.
-
Judgment on time limit
The tribunal decided it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to present his claim in time and dismissed the claim.
-
Costs judgment
The tribunal awarded costs of £1,200 (including VAT) against the claimant for unreasonable conduct in the proceedings.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to present his unfair dismissal claim within the three-month time limit (as extended by ACAS early conciliation), and if not, whether to extend time.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim as it was presented out of time.
- The claimant's employment ended on 23 May 2022. He contacted ACAS on 22 August 2022 (the last day of the normal three-month limit) and the ACAS certificate was issued on 3 October 2022, extending the deadline to 3 November 2022.
- He presented his claim on 6 January 2023, about two months late.
- The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for him to have presented the claim in time, as he had support from his sister-in-law and had not provided medical evidence of incapacity during the relevant period.
- Costs of £1,200 were later awarded against the claimant for unreasonable conduct.
Lessons & takeaways
- The three-month time limit for unfair dismissal claims is strict; even a short delay can be fatal.
- Contacting ACAS early does not automatically extend the deadline — you must still file your claim promptly after the ACAS certificate is issued.
- Mental health issues may excuse a delay only if supported by medical evidence showing you were unable to act during the relevant period.
- Lack of knowledge of time limits is rarely a valid excuse, especially if you have support from family or friends.
- If you are representing yourself, ensure you prepare evidence on the time limit issue before the hearing.
A missed deadline that cost the claim
This case shows how unforgiving employment tribunal time limits can be. The former security guard's employment ended on 23 May 2022. He and his sister-in-law contacted ACAS on the very last day of the normal three-month period — 22 August 2022. After ACAS issued its certificate on 3 October, the deadline became 3 November 2022. But the claimant did not present his claim until 6 January 2023, roughly two months late.
The tribunal accepted that the claimant had mental health difficulties and did not understand the law. However, it noted that he had the support of his sister-in-law throughout, and that he had not provided any medical evidence to show he was unable to act during the period between October and January. Without such evidence, the tribunal could not find it was not reasonably practicable for him to have met the deadline.
What the respondent did right
Wanis Management Services LLP identified the time issue early and raised it in their grounds of resistance. At the hearing, they presented a skeleton argument and cross-examined the claimant on the delay. The tribunal also noted that the claimant's witness statement did not address the time limit, and his sister-in-law's late attempt to introduce GP records showed only that he had seen his GP after the claim was presented — too late to help.
Why this matters for similar claims
The case is a stark reminder that time limits are a procedural hurdle that cannot be ignored. Even a claimant with genuine mental health struggles must provide contemporaneous medical evidence to show they were incapable of filing. The fact that the claimant was unrepresented and unfamiliar with the law did not help him — tribunals expect claimants to seek advice or at least make reasonable efforts to understand the process. For anyone considering an unfair dismissal claim, the message is clear: act quickly, keep records of any medical issues, and do not assume that contacting ACAS buys you unlimited time.
Similar cases
Former ambulance service employee's claim struck out as out of time
A former ambulance service employee had her unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims struck out after lodging them over three weeks late. She was ordered to pay £4,305.48 in costs.
Unfair dismissal claim dismissed despite severe mental health: the 'reasonable period' trap
A bank employee's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed as out of time, even though the tribunal accepted her severe mental health made it not reasonably practicable to claim within the first three months.
Cleaning operative's unfair dismissal claims dismissed as out of time
A cleaning operative who filed two unfair dismissal claims after the three-month deadline has had both claims dismissed. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for him to have filed in time.
Racial harassment claim dismissed as out of time and unsupported by evidence
A tribunal dismissed a former NHS assistant practitioner's racial harassment claims, finding the allegations were not supported by evidence and were brought too late. The claimant was ordered to pay £5,000 costs for unreasonable conduct.