Mr. Russell Tysoe v Deloitte LLP Heard — 2022

The tribunal found that the claimant’s employment began on 19 August 2019 and ended with immediate effect on 5 August 2021, when Mr Whitton told him at the disciplinary hearing that his employment was being terminated and that he would receive four weeks’ pay in lieu of notice. The tribunal accepted Mr Whitton’s evidence that later documents showing a 3 September 2021 leave date were generated by administrative error, and it rejected the claimant’s case that he had been placed on garden leave or served notice. On that basis, the claimant had not completed two years’ continuous employment and the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

On the disability issue, the tribunal accepted that the claimant had dyslexia and that it amounted to a disability within s.6 Equality Act 2010. It found that the impairment was long-term, that it had a substantial adverse effect on his ability to read, write and communicate, and that he needed adjustments such as adapted technology and note-taking to manage its effects. The tribunal therefore treated disability as established, but it did not go on to determine the merits of any reasonable adjustments complaint.

The existing reasonable adjustments claim was held to be out of time. The tribunal found that the relevant last date for that complaint was 2 July 2021, and that Early Conciliation did not begin until 17 October 2021, beyond the three-month less one day period in s.123 Equality Act 2010. The claimant gave no evidence or submissions supporting a just and equitable extension, and the tribunal said it was not persuaded to exercise its discretion to extend time.

The claimant also sought to amend the claim to add a further reasonable adjustments complaint about being required to write meeting minutes. The tribunal applied the Selkent factors, noted that the amendment was a new claim, and held that it would also be out of time. It refused the amendment because of the claimant’s unexplained delay, the prejudice to the respondent in meeting a new allegation, and the absence of any sufficient basis for extending time.