Background:

The claimant wished to bring an unfair dismissal claim against the respondent.  The issue for the EAT here was in relation to the application of time limits.  The claimant instructed solicitors to represent her.  The solicitor dealing with her case was recently qualified and had been working from home due to the effects of the pandemic.    The solicitor in the case did not seem to understand the effect of the conciliation certificate but in any event had sent the ET1 within time.  However, the ET1 was not sent to the correct address.  The date in which time would expire was 10th March.

On 10th March the solicitor was informed via email that there was deficient service.  On this day, the ET1 was sent via post and arrived two days out of time.  

Outcome:

At first instance, the Tribunal allowed the case to continue stating that time could be extended in the circumstances.  This was appealed by the respondent.  It was held by the EAT that time should not be extended in this case.   Whilst the EAT did consider the fact it was the solicitor’s first Employment Tribunal case that was not a reason allowing for the extension of time.  It was held that any professional adviser, whether inexperienced or not, should know the basic points.  Therefore, the case was not allowed to proceed on the basis of the failure to present the ET1 on time.

Practical Guidance for Employers:

The guidance in this situation goes to legal representatives and ensuring that claims are presented on time.  The EAT has demonstrated the limited scope they have when it comes to those submitted out of time by legal professionals.  In that situation, it may lead to a claim being brought against the solicitor by the client considering the effect that it has on their case.
https://www.gov.uk/employment-appeal-tribunal-decisions/bliss-residential-care-ltd-v-teresa-eileen-fellows-2023-eat-8