Employment Tribunal Extends Time Limits for Ill Health Dismissal Claims - Saint v RNLI

The Employment Tribunal has ruled that a former RNLI Coxswain can proceed with his claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination despite filing after the standard three-month time limit. Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto found that the claimant's confusion about his effective termination date made it "not reasonably practicable" to file within the original deadline, marking an important development in the interpretation of time limit extensions.

Background and Material Facts

Mr. Saint served as a Coxswain at Aldeburgh Lifeboat Station until undergoing spinal surgery in 2021. Following the surgery, it became apparent that he could not return to his operational role. After a process that included addressing a grievance raised by Mr. Saint, the RNLI dismissed him on grounds of ill health capability on February 27, 2023.

The case's complexity arose from the interaction between the notice period and payment in lieu of notice (PILON). While the dismissal letter indicated a termination date of June 2, 2023 (following a three-month notice period), Mr. Saint opted for PILON, which effectively made March 3, 2023, his last day of employment. This discrepancy became central to the tribunal's considerations.

Legal Analysis

The tribunal addressed two key jurisdictional questions: whether it was "not reasonably practicable" to file the unfair dismissal claim within the standard time limit, and whether it was "just and equitable" to extend time for the disability discrimination claim. Both claims were filed on September 2, 2023, significantly after the primary limitation period from the March 3 termination date.

Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto's analysis focused on the claimant's state of mind and conduct. The evidence demonstrated that Mr. Saint had actively sought legal advice and taken steps to protect his rights, including significant financial investment in legal counsel. The judge found that Mr. Saint had genuinely believed June 2 was the relevant date, noting that this belief, while incorrect, was understandable given the circumstances and documentation provided by the employer.

The Decision

The tribunal found that Mr. Saint's genuine confusion about the operative date, combined with his otherwise diligent approach to pursuing his rights, rendered it "not reasonably practicable" to file within the original time limit. For the disability discrimination claim, the judge determined that extending time was "just and equitable," observing that any prejudice from the delay would affect both parties equally and that the same practical challenges would have existed even if the claim had been filed in late May rather than early September.

Commentary

This judgment provides valuable guidance on the tribunal's approach to time limit extensions, particularly in cases involving complex termination arrangements. It suggests that tribunals may take a sympathetic view when claimants miss deadlines due to genuine confusion about technical aspects of their dismissal, provided they have otherwise acted diligently.

The case also serves as a reminder to employers about the importance of clear communication regarding termination dates, especially when PILON is involved. The apparent contradiction between the dismissal letter and accompanying email demonstrates how easily confusion can arise in such situations.

Practical Significance

For practitioners, this case underlines the importance of careful documentation and clear advice regarding termination dates and limitation periods. It also suggests that tribunals may be willing to take a holistic view of a claimant's conduct when considering time limit extensions, looking beyond mere compliance with deadlines to examine the overall context and the claimant's approach to pursuing their rights.

Before Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto
Judgment Date: May 15, 2024