Mr I Khan v Eastern Airlines (UK) Ltd — 2019

This was a preliminary hearing at Hull on 24 April 2019. The claim had been presented on 12 February 2019 after a period of early conciliation, and the claimant's employment had ended on 3 October 2018. The dispute arose from the respondent's calculation of the amount recoverable under a training bond on termination. The claimant's breach of contract case was that the respondent was seeking to recover £13,000 rather than the £9,000 he said was due on a proper reading of the contract.

The tribunal held that the breach of contract claim was out of time and refused to extend time. It found that the claimant had not read and analysed his contract in time, that he had shown the contract to a solicitor without the relevant wording being spotted, and that ignorance of his contractual rights was not a sufficient reason under Regulation 7 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction Order 1994. The breach of contract claim was therefore struck out.

The race discrimination claim was treated differently. The claimant said that, unlike three colleagues with identically worded training bond agreements, he had been subjected to a more restrictive reading of the repayment provisions. The tribunal accepted his evidence that he only became aware of the alleged difference in treatment in late January 2019, after speaking to a former colleague and then corresponding with the respondent by email on 23 and 31 January.

Applying section 123 of the Equality Act 2010, the tribunal found the race discrimination claim to be at most around 10 days out of time, with no evidence of prejudice to the respondent. It considered the balance of prejudice to favour the claimant and extended time so the claim could proceed. It also declined to strike out the claim or order a deposit, saying there was an arguable case on the interpretation of the contract and evidence that others in a similar position may have been treated more favourably when calculating the clawback.