Radiographer's unfair dismissal claim dismissed as out of time
An NHS radiographer who was dismissed over right-to-work concerns had her unfair dismissal claim rejected because she presented it 18 days late. The tribunal found she could have filed on time.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Radiographer from 4 July 2011 until summarily dismissed on 19 February 2020.
- The claimant was re-employed from 18 March 2020 and resigned on 18 February 2022.
- The unfair dismissal claim was presented on 29 July 2020, after the 11 July 2020 deadline.
- The claimant contacted ACAS on 11 May 2020 and an Early Conciliation Certificate was issued on 11 June 2020.
- The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to present her claim in time.
- The race discrimination and harassment claims were dismissed as not well founded.
Timeline
-
Employment commenced
Claimant started work as a Radiographer for the Respondent.
-
Upper Tribunal hearing
Claimant succeeded in appeal regarding permanent residence, but did not inform Respondent.
-
Claimant emailed about right to work
Claimant provided Notice of Receipt of Secretary of State's appeal but not the Upper Tribunal judgment.
-
Summary dismissal
Claimant dismissed for allegedly lacking right to work; dismissal meeting held same day.
-
Disclosure to staff
Paula Brown told staff the claimant was dismissed for not having right to work.
-
Email to department
Paula Brown sent email about claimant's situation at claimant's request.
-
Re-employment
Claimant re-employed after Home Office issued Certificate of Application.
-
ACAS early conciliation started
Claimant notified ACAS of potential claim.
-
ACAS certificate issued
Early Conciliation Certificate issued, extending deadline to 11 July 2020.
-
Claim presented
Claimant presented her claim to the Tribunal, 18 days late.
-
Resignation
Claimant resigned from employment.
The legal issue
Whether the claimant's unfair dismissal claim was presented within the statutory time limit, and whether she was discriminated against or harassed because of race.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. The unfair dismissal claim was out of time: the claimant contacted ACAS on 11 May 2020 and received an early conciliation certificate on 11 June 2020, extending the deadline to 11 July 2020. She presented her claim on 29 July 2020 – 18 days late. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for her to have presented the claim by the deadline, so it had no jurisdiction to hear it.
The race discrimination and harassment claims were also dismissed as not well founded. The tribunal found no evidence that the respondent's actions were because of the claimant's race.
No compensation was awarded as all claims failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employment tribunal claims have strict time limits – usually three months less one day from the dismissal date, including the early conciliation extension. Missing the deadline by even a few days can be fatal.
- If you are dismissed, act quickly: contact ACAS early conciliation within the initial time limit to preserve your right to claim.
- Keep your employer informed of any changes to your right to work status – failing to share a successful immigration appeal can undermine your case.
- Representing yourself at tribunal can be challenging; consider seeking legal advice on time limits and evidence early on.
A case decided on timing
This case shows how strict employment tribunal time limits can be. The claimant, a radiographer with eight years' service, was dismissed in February 2020 over concerns about her right to work in the UK. She was re-employed a month later after providing a Home Office certificate, but she still wanted to challenge her original dismissal.
She contacted ACAS in time and received an early conciliation certificate, which extended her deadline to 11 July 2020. However, she did not present her claim until 29 July – 18 days late. The tribunal found that it was reasonably practicable for her to have filed on time, so it had no jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal claim.
What the tribunal said about discrimination
The claimant also alleged race discrimination and harassment, arguing that the respondent's handling of her right-to-work checks and the disclosure of her dismissal to colleagues were motivated by her race. The tribunal rejected these claims, finding no evidence that the respondent's actions were because of her race. The respondent had acted on a genuine belief about her right to work, and the disclosure to staff was limited and not harassing.
What this means for similar claims
This case is a reminder that even a strong unfair dismissal case can fail if the claim is presented late. The tribunal will only extend the deadline if it was not reasonably practicable to file on time – a high bar. For anyone considering a tribunal claim, the key lesson is to act promptly and keep track of all deadlines, including the ACAS early conciliation extension. Seeking legal advice early can help avoid procedural pitfalls.
Similar cases
Former employee's race discrimination claim dismissed but holiday pay awarded
A former employee's claim for unfair dismissal and race discrimination failed due to time limits, but the tribunal awarded £243.54 for unpaid holiday pay.
Dismissed after final written warning: conduct decision upheld by tribunal
A client care associate with six years' service was dismissed for aggressive behaviour and unauthorised absences while on a final written warning. The tribunal upheld the dismissal, finding the employer acted reasonably.
Former employee's claims dismissed as out of time despite early conciliation
A former employee's unfair dismissal and discrimination claims were struck out after the tribunal found they were presented too late, even though she had started early conciliation.
Probationary dismissal claim struck out due to insufficient service and late filing
A sales executive dismissed during probation for poor performance had his unfair dismissal and race discrimination claims thrown out because he lacked two years' service and filed his claim 17 days late.