Termination date

Case 4: The facts

Mr Palfrey was given notice of his dismissal for redundancy, but had the option to bring forward his leaving date and receive payment in lieu of notice. He took up this option, and received a fresh redundancy notice with an earlier redundancy date.

Palfrey later issued a claim for unfair dismissal, but did not do so within three months of the new date.

The ruling

The EAT held that there had been a variation of notice, which had brought forward the date of termination of employment. As a result, Palfrey's claim in the tribunal was out of time.

Palfrey v Transco UKEAT/0990/03