VadeLab
Allowed in PartEmployment Tribunal·england-and-wales·

Late Unfair Dismissal Claim Allowed by Employment Tribunal

Case No. · Judges Employment, Taft

📌 In brief

An employment tribunal allowed a worker's late unfair dismissal claim because it wasn't practicable for them to file on time. However, they dismissed their claims of race discrimination and harassment against their employer.

⚖️ Legal holding

An employer must consider the reasonableness of a late unfair dismissal claim if it was not practicable for the employee to present it within time limits.

Topics

unfair dismissalrace discriminationharassment

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Equality Act 2010 s.13 — Direct discrimination

This section defines direct discrimination, stating that a person (A) discriminates against another (B) if, because of a protected characteristic, A treats B less favorably than A treats or would treat others. It also outlines exceptions for different protected characteristics, including age, disability, and race.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.

📖 Technical summary

The claimant's unfair dismissal claim was allowed due to reasonable impracticability, while claims of direct race discrimination and harassment were dismissed.

📜 Headnote Official document

The claimant's unfair dismissal claim was allowed due to impracticability in presenting the claim within time limits, while claims of direct race discrimination and harassment were dismissed.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed in Part

Case Number: 3306256/25

1

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS

Claimant: [redacted] Respondent: [redacted] Cambridge Employment Tribunal (by video) On: 17 December 2025 Before: Employment Judge Taft

REPRESENTATION:

Claimant: [redacted] Respondent: [redacted] JUDGMENT

1. The claim of unfair dismissal was not presented within the applicable time limit, but it was not reasonably practicable to do so. The claim of unfair dismissal was presented within a further reasonable period. The claim of unfair dismissal will therefore proceed.

Approved by: Employment Judge Taft 22 December 2025 Judgment sent to the parties on: 29 December 2025 …………………………………… For the Tribunal:

……………………………………

Case Number: 3306256/25

2

Notes Reasons for the judgment having been given orally at the hearing, written reasons will not be provided unless a request was made by either party at the hearing or a written request is presented by either party within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision. If written reasons are provided they will be placed online. All judgments (apart from judgments under Rule 51) and any written reasons for the judgments are published, in full, online at https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions shortly after a copy has been sent to the claimants and respondents. If a Tribunal hearing has been recorded, you may request a transcript of the recording. Unless there are exceptional circumstances, you will have to pay for it. If a transcript is produced it will not include any oral judgment or reasons given at the hearing. The transcript will not be checked, approved or verified by a judge. There is more information in the joint Presidential Practice Direction on the Recording and Transcription of Hearings and accompanying Guidance, which can be found at www.judiciary.uk/guidance-and-resources/employment-rules-and-legislation- practice-directions/

Case Number: 3305617/2024 and 3306256/2025 (formerly reform case 6028793/2025)

1

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS

Claimant

Respondent C [APPELLANT] v [RESPONDENT] [COMPANY] at: Reading

On: 3,4,5 and 6 February 2026 Before: Employment Judge W Anderson

Appearances For the Claimant: [redacted]

For the Respondent: [redacted]

The claimant’s claims of unfair dismissal, direct race discrimination and harassment are dismissed.

Approved by:

Employment Judge W Anderson

Date: 6 February 2026

Sent to the parties on: 20 April 2026.....

............................................................

For the Tribunal Office .

Note Reasons for the judgment having been given orally at the hearing, written reasons will not be provided unless a request was made by either party at the hearing or a written request is presented by either party within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision.

2

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • An employer must consider the reasonableness of a late unfair dismissal claim if it was not practicable for the employee to present it within time limits.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • A respondent is entitled to recover costs from a litigant who unreasonably pursues an unsuccessful claim.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The tribunal allowed the worker's unfair dismissal claim but dismissed their claims of direct race discrimination and harassment.

Who was involved?

A worker (the claimant) and an employer (respondent).

How did the court decide, and why?

The tribunal considered that it wasn't practicable for the worker to file their unfair dismissal claim on time.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Employment Rights Act 1996 s.98 and Equality Act 2010 s.13.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The impracticability of filing the unfair dismissal claim within time limits.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

For the worker on their unfair dismissal claim, but against them on discrimination and harassment claims.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone may have grounds to pursue an unfair dismissal claim even if it's late, depending on impracticability.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The tribunal likely considered the circumstances of filing the claim and any supporting documentation.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions from employment tribunals can often be appealed to an Employment Appeal Tribunal.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for specific guidance on your situation.

Official source: Employment Tribunal — england-and-wales headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the Employment Tribunal and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.