Case 1802957/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Mrs J Lamb v Sheffield City Council — 2021

Case reference: 1802957/2020
Decision date: 7 April 2021
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Brain REPRESENTATION

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs J Lamb

Respondent

Sheffield City Council

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Mrs J Lamb brought Equality Act 2010 complaints of direct age discrimination and harassment related to age against Sheffield City Council. At the preliminary hearing the tribunal considered only limitation. It assumed, for the purpose of the issue, that the complained-of conduct had continued to 18 November 2019, but held that the correspondence between 18 November 2019 and 21 January 2020 was part of settlement discussions, attracted without prejudice privilege, and did not amount to further discriminatory conduct or harassment. The tribunal also rejected any argument that the claimant's own 29 January 2020 correspondence extended the course of conduct, because only respondent acts could do that.

On that basis the tribunal found the claim was presented out of time under section 123 of the Equality Act 2010. It relied on South Western Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust v King for the proposition that a continuing act depends on discriminatory constituent acts, and it accepted that the respondent's grievance appeal outcome of 18 November 2019 marked the end of the relevant course of conduct. The tribunal held that there had been no unambiguous impropriety in the settlement correspondence and that the without prejudice rule applied.

The tribunal then applied the just and equitable test and extended time. It referred to Robertson v Bexley Community Centre trading as Leisure Link, British Coal Corporation v Keeble and Others, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board v Morgan, Adedeji v University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, and the general factors relevant to extension of time. The tribunal found the delay was short, the claimant's belief that the correspondence formed part of a continuing act was understandable, she had been on long-term sickness absence since January 2019, the cogency of the evidence was not affected, and the respondent had not shown material prejudice beyond inconvenience. Time was therefore extended to 9 June 2020, allowing the substantive claims to proceed.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Age discrimination	Preliminary limitation hearing only. The tribunal held the ordinary time limit had expired on its analysis but extended time under the just and equitable test so the substantive claim could proceed. No merits finding was made.	Other	Age	—
Harassment	Preliminary limitation hearing only. The tribunal held the ordinary time limit had expired on its analysis but extended time under the just and equitable test so the substantive claim could proceed. No merits finding was made.	Other	Age	—

Legal tests applied

9 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.

Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

How we got this data

Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.

Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.