Mr S Ali v Royal Mail Group Limited — 2022

This was a reserved judgment on preliminary issues in a disability discrimination and victimisation claim. The claimant alleged that TBR was removed when adjusted duties were arranged in late 2014 or early 2015, that this was because of disability and/or victimisation, and that later events in 2021 were connected to the same issue. The respondent argued that older complaints were out of time and objected to some amendments.

The tribunal refused permission to amend to add a direct disability discrimination complaint about consideration of ill health retirement in 2012/2013. It accepted for the purpose of the application that the claimant did not know of the matter at the time, but found the complaint was very stale, standalone, and likely to cause serious evidential prejudice. The tribunal also refused permission to amend to add a complaint about an alleged earlier threat by Mr Colclough to remove TBR and shift allowance.

For the direct disability discrimination and victimisation complaints about Mr Colclough's removal of TBR, the tribunal found that the claimant had no reasonable prospect of establishing conduct extending over a period. It treated the alleged removal of TBR as a one-off decision with continuing consequences, and found insufficient linkage with Ms Maunder's 2021 decision to make the earlier complaints part of a continuing act. The tribunal also declined to extend time on a just and equitable basis, finding that the claimant had made a considered decision at the time not to pursue the matter and that the delay prejudiced the respondent. Those complaints were struck out. Other more recent complaints, including the complaint about Ms Maunder and permitted grievance-related amendments, were left to proceed and were not determined in this judgment.