- WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FOR THE v - Written Submissions — 2020

The claimant presented a disability discrimination claim by ET1 dated 16 July 2019. The respondent said the claim should have been rejected because there were two early conciliation certificates and the number entered on the ET1 was that of the second certificate, which it said was impermissible. The tribunal recorded the relevant certificates, noted the authorities relied on by the respondent, and treated the issue as a pure point of law decided on the papers.

Applying Cranwell v Cullen, Sterling v United Learning Trust, HMRC v Serra Garau and EON Control Solutions Ltd v Caspall, the tribunal held that the claimant’s position was identical to that of the claimant in EON Control in relation to the fourth claim discussed in that case. It said it was bound to treat the claim form as one that should have been rejected under the tribunal rules and that there was no discretion to do otherwise.

The tribunal therefore rejected the claim form as failing to comply with rule 10(1)(c)(i) and/or rule 12(2) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. It stated that the effect was as if the claim form had been rejected at the outset, and that the claimant would be notified of the rejection and the steps he might take going forward. No merits findings or remedy were recorded.