R Olyazadeh v Newcastle University

The Employment Appeal Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal limited to the tribunal's assessment of whether it was "not reasonably practicable" to present an unfair dismissal and notice pay claim within the primary three-month limit under section 111(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The EAT held that the Employment Judge erred by either not considering the explanation the claimant had given — that the confused procedural history led her reasonably to believe her earlier constructive dismissal claim was the correct vehicle — or by giving no or no adequate reasons for rejecting that explanation against the statutory test of reasonable practicability. The EAT upheld the tribunal's primary factual finding that the effective date of termination was 18 April 2023, but remitted the single issue of reasonable practicability back to the Employment Judge for reconsideration under section 111(2)(b).

Background and parties:

• The appellant was employed as a research associate from 20 March 2020. She brought a first ET1 on 3 April 2023 and then a second ET1 after preliminary hearings. The respondent is Newcastle University.
• Claims included unfair dismissal, discrimination in relation to pregnancy, race and maternity, notice pay and redundancy-related claims.

Procedural history:

• The matter proceeded through preliminary hearings before Employment Judges Robertson and Sweeney, and then before Employment Judge Langridge (judgment dated 14 December 2023). The appellant appealed to the EAT (notice of appeal dated 24 January 2024, seal-date 25 January 2024); this judgment is [2025] EAT 17.

Key issues:

1. Whether the Second Claim (unfair dismissal and notice pay) was presented within the statutory time limit or, if not, whether it was "not reasonably practicable" to present it within time under section 111(2)(b) ERA 1996.
2. Whether the tribunal was entitled to find the effective date of termination was 18 April 2023 (i.e. resignation by the claimant) and whether that finding amounted to a retrospective dismissal.

Court's reasoning:

• The EAT accepted the tribunal's detailed factual findings that the respondent treated the employment as ending on 18 April 2023 and that the claimant's conduct and communications supported that effective date. The tribunal was entitled to conclude on the facts that the employment ended on 18 April 2023.
• However, on the narrow procedural point, the EAT found an error of law: the Employment Judge either failed to consider the appellant's explanation that the confused procedural history made it not reasonably practicable to bring the Second Claim earlier, or failed to give adequate reasons for rejecting that explanation against the statutory test. The judge's language that the claimant "did not identify any reason" and that there was "no explanation" for not acting before 24 August 2023 was treated as insufficient or erroneous because the claimant had in fact given an explanation in her statement.
• The EAT concluded the error relates only to the reasonable practicability decision and that no further evidence is required. It therefore remitted that discrete issue under section 111(2)(b) to Employment Judge Langridge to reconsider (or to another judge if remission to her is not possible), inviting written submissions and no further oral evidence.

Appeal allowed in part. The EAT held that the Employment Judge erred in relation to the assessment of reasonable practicability under section 111(2)(b) ERA 1996 by either failing to consider the claimant’s explanation that the confused history of proceedings made it not reasonably practicable to present the claim earlier, or by giving no adequate reasons for rejecting that explanation. The EAT upheld the tribunal’s factual finding that the effective date of termination was 18 April 2023. The matter was remitted to the Employment Judge to reconsider the reasonable practicability question with written submissions and no further evidence.

Appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal from a judgment of Employment Judge Langridge sitting at the Newcastle Employment Tribunal dated 14 December 2023 (sent to the parties 15 December 2023). Notice of appeal dated 24 January 2024 (seal-date 25 January 2024). This EAT judgment is [2025] EAT 17 (hearing 30 January 2025). Prior preliminary hearings before Employment Judges Robertson and Sweeney at the Employment Tribunal are recorded in the tribunal’s judgment and chronology.