Unfair dismissal claim struck out for being 12 days late
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed because she presented it 12 days after the three-month deadline. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for her to have claimed on time.
1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- Claimant was employed from 1 May 2017 to 17 February 2023.
- Effective date of termination was 17 February 2023.
- Claim form was received by the tribunal on 29 May 2023, 12 days after the deadline.
- Claimant contacted Acas on 19 May 2023, two days after the deadline.
- Claimant had low mood and was prescribed antidepressants but attended a job interview in March 2023.
- Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to present her claim in time.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment with T. Cribb & Sons Ltd.
-
Resignation letter
Claimant submitted her resignation, giving notice that her last day would be 18 February 2023.
-
Effective date of termination
Claimant's employment ended.
-
Job interview
Claimant attended a job interview, indicating she was able to function well at times.
-
Deadline to bring claim
Three-month deadline from effective date of termination expired.
-
Contacted Acas
Claimant called the Acas helpline, two days after the deadline.
-
Sought legal advice
Claimant obtained legal representation.
-
Claim presented
Claim form received by the Employment Tribunal.
-
Acas early conciliation certificate
Acas issued the early conciliation certificate.
-
Preliminary hearing
Tribunal heard the issue of whether the claim was presented in time.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the former employee's unfair dismissal claim was presented within the three-month time limit, or if an extension should be granted because it was not reasonably practicable for her to claim in time due to her mental health.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the claim as it was presented 12 days late. The key reason was that the former employee did not prove it was not reasonably practicable to claim in time. Although she had low mood and was on antidepressants, she attended a job interview in March 2023, showing she could function. She also contacted Acas only two days after the deadline and took a further 10 days to submit her claim, with no good explanation for the delay.
Lessons & takeaways
- The three-month deadline for unfair dismissal claims is strict; even a short delay can be fatal.
- Mental health issues may support an extension, but you must show they made it not reasonably practicable to claim in time, not just that they affected your mood.
- Contacting Acas after the deadline does not automatically extend the time; you must still present your claim promptly.
- Seeking legal advice late in the process is not a valid excuse for missing the deadline.
A strict deadline with limited exceptions
This case shows how strictly employment tribunals apply the three-month time limit for unfair dismissal claims. The former employee's claim was just 12 days late, but the tribunal still struck it out. The law allows an extension only if it was 'not reasonably practicable' to present the claim in time – a much harder test than the 'just and equitable' test used in discrimination claims.
What the tribunal considered
The former employee argued that her low mood and antidepressant medication made it difficult to act. However, the tribunal noted that she had attended a job interview in March 2023, which showed she was able to function. She also contacted Acas two days after the deadline but then took another 10 days to submit her claim, without a good explanation. The tribunal found that it was reasonably practicable for her to have presented the claim within the original time limit.
What this means for similar claims
If you are considering an unfair dismissal claim, the clock starts ticking from your effective date of termination. Do not wait until the last moment to contact Acas or seek legal advice. If you have health issues, gather medical evidence that explains why you could not act in time – not just that you felt unwell. A short delay is not automatically excused, and the tribunal will look at what you actually did during the period.
What the respondent did right
T. Cribb & Sons Ltd successfully argued that the claim was out of time. The employer did not need to address the merits of the dismissal because the procedural issue was decisive. This highlights that employers can defeat a claim on timing alone, even if the underlying dismissal might have been unfair.
Similar cases
Unfair dismissal claim struck out after email submission ignored automatic reply
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim was struck out as out of time after she emailed her ET1 form and failed to read the tribunal's automatic reply stating that claims cannot be accepted by email.
Dismissed by email: a day's delay that cost the claim
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim was thrown out because he contacted ACAS two days after the three-month deadline, even though he read his dismissal email the day after it was sent.
Constructive dismissal claim thrown out for being over two months late
A former employee who resigned and then waited until after his grievance appeal to bring an unfair dismissal claim was too late. The tribunal ruled it had no jurisdiction to hear the claim, which was presented over two months after the three-month time limit expired.
Dismissed and out of time: tribunal allows claim after year-long delay
A former employee who submitted her unfair dismissal claim nearly a year late has been allowed to proceed after the tribunal found she was reasonably ignorant of the correct procedure.