Miss McGauley v Dimensions (UK) Ltd — 2022

This was a preliminary judgment on limitation in Miss McGauley's disability discrimination proceedings against Dimensions UK Limited. The respondent accepted that she was disabled at the material times. The complaints identified in the case management order included direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, failure to make reasonable adjustments, disability-related harassment, and an alleged unauthorised deduction of £210 from wages. The tribunal did not decide the merits of those complaints.

The tribunal accepted that the last alleged discriminatory act occurred on 16 July 2019 and that the claim presented on 3 September 2020 was brought 14 months after that date, or 11 months out of time. It found that the claimant's mental health was extremely poor from June 2019, that she was sectioned and detained in hospital in July 2019, and that she had severely reduced capacity to manage her affairs and decisions about possible litigation. Although she raised a grievance and subject access requests, the tribunal found that doing so exhausted her limited personal resources.

For the period from February 2020 to September 2020, the tribunal accepted that the claimant and Mrs Masters had sought advice from ACAS, solicitors and Citizens Advice, but did not understand that there was a three-month tribunal time limit. It also accepted that the claimant's ability to deal with litigation remained severely impaired, that her condition fluctuated, and that the early Covid-19 lockdown limited the practical assistance Mrs Masters could provide.

Applying section 123 Equality Act 2010 and the just and equitable discretion, the tribunal concluded that the claimant had provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay. It found no suggestion that the delay had caused deterioration of evidence or prevented the respondent from answering the allegations, and held that the prejudice to the claimant if she could not pursue the disability discrimination complaints outweighed the prejudice to the respondent. Time was extended so that the claimant's claims could be pursued.