The High Court quashed an Employment Appeals Tribunal decision that it lacked jurisdiction to hear Alan Brady’s unfair dismissal claim, and ordered a different division of the tribunal to hear the claim anew.
In a judgment delivered on 30 May 2014, Mr Justice Barrett also declared that the tribunal had jurisdiction. He found that Bohemian Football Club was estopped from arguing that Brady’s dismissal took effect about two weeks after the date it had told him it was effective.
Brady had worked as a bar manager for the club from around October 2008. The judgment says he was dismissed for redundancy on 16 December 2011. When he asked when the dismissal took effect, he was told “Now.” No written notice of dismissal or P45 was provided, the court said.
An unfair dismissal notice dated 22 December 2011 was lodged with the tribunal the next day, citing 16 December as the dismissal date. The club submitted a defence in March 2012 without raising a jurisdictional objection. It first argued at the tribunal hearing on 3 May 2013 that the claim was premature because, taking an alleged two-week redundancy period into account, the dismissal took effect later.
The tribunal accepted that argument in its determination of 5 September 2013 and declined jurisdiction. Barrett noted that the late objection had deprived Brady of the chance to lodge another claim to cure the alleged timing problem.
The court concluded that the tribunal had notice of the claim at the start of, and throughout, the statutory six-month period for bringing an unfair dismissal claim. It held that, in the circumstances, notice lodged before that period began could still satisfy the law when the tribunal retained notice during the period. The judgment cited the purpose of statutory time limits, equitable principles and an earlier tribunal decision, Matthews v Sandisk International Limited.
The court said its finding on estoppel did not, by itself, mean the tribunal’s jurisdiction decision was wrong as a matter of law. It then separately concluded that the tribunal did have jurisdiction. The orders quashed the 2013 determination, directed a different tribunal division to rehear Brady’s claim, and declared the club estopped from relying on a dismissal date about two weeks later than the immediate termination it had represented.