|
The Claimant was dismissed in a letter, delivered by recorded delivery and signed for by her son, on 30th November 2006. She was expecting the decision letter to arrive, but was with her sister for a few days as the latter gave birth. The Claimant didn't open the letter until 4th December. She presented an unfair dismissal claim on 2nd March. This was important because if the effective date of termination was held to be the 30th November, her unfair dismissal claim was out of time. Most claims have a three month time limit within which to bring a claim. If it was held to be the 4th December, then her unfair dismissal claim was presented within time.
The Supreme Court held that the effective date of termination was 4th December. In other words when she actually read the letter. As she neither knew of the decision until 4th December, nor had deliberately failed to open the letter or gone away to avoid reading it, then the effective date of termination would be the date she actually learned of the decision to dismiss.
The Supreme Court stated that, on policy grounds, it was desirable to interpret the time limit legislation in a way favourable to the employee, and that strict contractual laws concerning termination of contracts should not displace the statutory framework.
Full Case |