Caretaker's unfair dismissal claim struck out as time-barred, but discrimination claim allowed
A caretaker with 9 years' service had his unfair dismissal claim struck out for being six weeks late, but his disability discrimination claim was allowed to proceed. No compensation awarded.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a caretaker from 2013 until dismissal on 21 February 2022.
- The claimant had health issues including spinal stenosis and a brain aneurysm, which were conceded as a disability.
- The claimant lodged his claim on 26 July 2022, about six weeks after the limitation period expired.
- The claimant sent two claim forms to his union's email address instead of the Tribunal.
- The claimant had access to advice from his union, Citizens Advice, and ACAS.
- The unfair dismissal claim was struck out as time-barred, but the disability discrimination claim was allowed to proceed.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began working as a caretaker for Catalyst Housing Limited.
-
Dismissal effective
Claimant was dismissed on grounds of incapability due to ill health.
-
Early conciliation started
Early conciliation period began.
-
Early conciliation ended
Early conciliation period ended.
-
First claim form sent to union
Claimant emailed first claim form to union email address.
-
Second claim form sent to union
Claimant emailed second claim form to union email address.
-
Claim lodged with Tribunal
Claimant's partner telephoned union and was told to send claim to Tribunal; claim lodged.
-
Preliminary hearing
Hearing on strike-out applications for time bar.
-
Judgment issued
Employment Judge R Wood issued judgment striking out unfair dismissal claim but allowing disability discrimination claim to proceed.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims were filed within the statutory time limits, and if not, whether time should be extended.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim as time-barred, but allowed the disability discrimination claim to proceed to a full hearing.
The key reasons were:
- The claimant lodged his claim about six weeks after the limitation period expired.
- He sent his claim forms to his union's email address instead of the Tribunal, and did not follow up for two weeks.
- For unfair dismissal, the test is 'reasonably practicable' to extend time, and the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to file on time.
- For disability discrimination, the test is 'just and equitable', and the tribunal exercised its discretion to allow the claim to proceed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Always send your claim form directly to the Employment Tribunal, not to a union or adviser.
- If you have a disability that affects your memory or cognition, tell the tribunal early and seek help to meet deadlines.
- The time limit for unfair dismissal is strict — even a few weeks late can mean your claim is struck out.
- Disability discrimination claims have a more flexible time limit, so they may survive even if an unfair dismissal claim does not.
When a few weeks can cost you your claim
This case shows how unforgiving the time limits can be for unfair dismissal claims. The claimant, a caretaker with nine years' service, was dismissed on grounds of ill-health incapability. He had serious health conditions, including spinal stenosis and a brain aneurysm, which were conceded as disabilities. But when he tried to bring his claim, he sent the forms to his union's email address instead of the Tribunal. By the time he realised his mistake and filed correctly, he was about six weeks late.
Two different tests for two different claims
The tribunal applied two different legal tests. For unfair dismissal, the law asks whether it was 'reasonably practicable' to file on time. The claimant had access to advice from his union, Citizens Advice, and ACAS. He had filled out the forms correctly but sent them to the wrong place. The tribunal found that it was reasonably practicable to file on time — he simply made a mistake. So that claim was struck out.
For disability discrimination, the test is 'just and equitable' to extend time. Here, the tribunal has wider discretion. It noted the claimant's cognitive impairment from his brain aneurysm and the fact that his partner had no legal experience. It allowed this claim to proceed to a full hearing.
What this means for similar claims
The case is a reminder that time limits are not the same for every type of claim. If you have an unfair dismissal claim, the window is tight and the test for extending it is narrow. If you also have a discrimination claim, you may get a second chance under the 'just and equitable' test. But the safest approach is always to file your claim with the Tribunal as soon as possible — and double-check the address.
Similar cases
Claim struck out after failure to comply with tribunal orders due to ill-health
A former employee's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims against Marks and Spencer were struck out after she failed to comply with tribunal orders and did not actively pursue her claim.
Claims struck out after former employee fails to attend hearing or comply with orders
A former employee's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims have been struck out after he failed to attend a preliminary hearing and did not comply with tribunal orders to provide evidence.
Threatening emails and abuse of witnesses: claim struck out as vexatious
A former employee who sent threatening emails to colleagues and called a witness a liar outside the tribunal room had his unfair dismissal claim struck out. The tribunal said a fair trial was no longer possible.
Strike-out of disability discrimination claim against CEO: no specific allegations
A former employee's disability discrimination claim against the CEO of CSH Surrey was struck out after she failed to particularise any specific allegations against him. The tribunal found the claim had no reasonable prospects of success.