Jason Elliott was called to the Bar of Northern Ireland in 2013 and is the Associate Head of School of Law at Ulster University. As a practising barrister, he has developed a largely civil practice representing individuals, companies and public bodies in litigation. This covers a wide range of areas including personal injuries, wills and employment law. In terms of employment law, he has represented both applicants and respondents in the Industrial Tribunal. At Ulster University, Jason lectures extensively on the civil areas of practise such as Equity and Trusts and delivers employment law lectures for both undergraduate and postgraduate students.
Background:
The claimant is a medical doctor and was employed by the respondent as a GP from April 2018 until her dismissal on 26th July 2021. The dismissal arose based upon an allegation of drugs theft. However, despite investigation from the PSNI there was no prosecution directed by the PPS. She lodged a claim on 26th October 2021 claiming, inter alia, unfair dismissal and sex discrimination.
Whilst the claim form was lodged on 26th October 2021 (exactly three months from the effective date of termination) it was rejected as it was not accompanied by the conciliation certificate. It was lodged by the claimant’s solicitors who were instructed that day. The claimant conceded that she was aware of the time limits but that the conciliation was an administrative error on her part.
There was a period of six weeks between the claim form being rejected and a complaint being subsequently lodged. The reason for this was that the firm of solicitors did not receive the payment until then. The claimant was unable to provide an explanation as to why the payment was not made. The claimant did argue that she was waiting for the internal appeal to be heard before initiating proceedings.
Outcome:
The Tribunal held that the claims were brought out of time and there was no practical impediment to lodging the complaints in time. It was ‘fanciful’ to suggest that the lack of conciliation certificate was a practical impediment to satisfy that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim. For the discrimination claims, the Tribunal found that there were no grounds upon which they could extend time. The claimant took no steps to apply herself to ensure that she accorded with the procedural requirements. There was no valid explanation as to why the claim was not presented. Accordingly, the claims were dismissed.
Practical Guidance for Employers:
This is yet another case relating to time limits in the Tribunal. This case demonstrates, though, that where the claim form is rejected due to the lack of conciliation certificate that will not be a valid reason to allow for an extension of time. The lack of payment to a solicitor and failure to outline why such a failure was made was, again, not a valid reason to extend time.
NI Tribunal decisions are available on the OITFET website:
http://www.employmenttribunalsni.co.uk/
Continue reading
We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.
Please log in to view the full article.
What you'll get:
- Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
- Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
- 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
- Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team
Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial
