The Claimant made a claim for unfair dismissal 62 days outside the primary time limit. The ET held that it had jurisdiction to deal with the Claimant's claim of unfair dismissal. The ET held that the combination of having to deal with a fitness to practice ("FTP") investigation by the Claimant's regulatory body, the HCPC, the deterioration of the Claimant's mental health and his dyslexia meant that it was not reasonably practicable for him to have presented his claim within the time limit. The ET also found that the further delay of 62 days was reasonable in light of the time and effort that the Claimant was expending dealing with the HCPC investigation, exacerbated by his dyslexia. The Respondent appealed.

The EAT allowed the appeal. Notwithstanding his dyslexia and mental health problems the Claimant had been able to do various things in the relevant period, including completing the formalities of early conciliation, working as a locum, moving house, engaging in great detail with the FTP proceedings and engaging in detailed correspondence. It was perverse for the ET to conclude that the Claimant was able to do all of this and yet was not able to ask somebody so as to find out the time limits for a tribunal claim.