Case 1401924/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L Thomas v Devon county Council — 2020
- Case reference
- 1401924/2020
- Decision date
- 12 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgley Appearances
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss L Thomas
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss L Thomas brought claims of constructive unfair dismissal and harassment contrary to section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 against Devon County Council. The Tribunal recorded that both claims were presented 9 years and 6 months out of time, so the case turned entirely on limitation rather than the merits.
For the constructive unfair dismissal claim, the Tribunal found that it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented within the primary time limit and that it was not presented within a reasonable period after that limit had expired. On that basis, the Tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the claim and dismissed it.
For the harassment claim, the Tribunal held that it would not be just and equitable to extend time. It found that the primary cause of the delay was the Claimant's belief that she would lose the claim because her account would be weighed against those of four individuals she said had harassed her. The Tribunal also found that the balance of prejudice favoured the Respondent because it no longer had any means of contacting those individuals. The harassment claim was therefore dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The claim was presented 9 years and 6 months out of time. The Tribunal held it was reasonably practicable to present the claim within time and that it was not presented within a reasonable period after expiry of the primary time limit, so it had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Harassment | The harassment claim under section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 was presented 9 years and 6 months out of time. The Tribunal held it would not be just and equitable to extend time, noting the Claimant's reason for delay and the prejudice to the Respondent from no longer being able to contact the individuals alleged to have harassed her. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- reasonably practicable
- reasonable period after the expiry of the primary time limit
- just and equitable
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.