Mr Antonio Jardim v Ministry of Defence — 2022

This was a preliminary issue decision about jurisdiction, time limits and amendment in a claim by a Royal Navy officer who said that his treatment after raising Christian objections to nuclear weapons amounted to discrimination. The Tribunal held that service personnel must have made a valid service complaint before the Tribunal has jurisdiction, and that complaints rejected as out of time under the service complaints process could not be considered.

The Tribunal found that allegations about events up to and including 16 June 2020 were within HoC1, which had been rejected as out of time, or were not included in a valid service complaint. Those matters, including removal from the Trident Officers General Course, being told to wait in his cabin, interviews, and not being allowed to return to the boat, could only be background and were outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction.

The Tribunal held that allegations concerning the suspension and restoration of the claimant's security clearance, the two-year bar on applying for Developed Vetting, delay in the security clearance process, and the asserted constructive dismissal were within HoC2 or clearly set out in the claim form and could proceed. The amendment was allowed for direct discrimination, harassment and indirect discrimination, but not for victimisation because no protected act had been raised in the service complaint or identified in the material before the Tribunal.