In Person For the v Respondent — 2018

At an open preliminary hearing on 10 June 2021, the tribunal considered whether the claimant could pursue in case 2200219/2020 complaints arising from her earlier 2018 proceedings and from later post-employment conduct. The tribunal applied issue estoppel, Henderson v Henderson, limitation rules, judicial proceedings immunity, and the strike-out test under Rule 37.

The breach of contract complaint about failure to pay NMW and deduction of accommodation offset was held barred by issue estoppel because the first claim had already determined the same factual issue, including the family-exception point. The earlier claim had found the claimant was entitled to NMW and had been underpaid by £269.90. The ordinary unfair dismissal claim was dismissed because the claimant had less than two years' continuous service and no automatic unfair dismissal case was advanced.

The tribunal struck out the complaints about failure to provide pay statements and accurate particulars of employment, together with the race discrimination allegations relating to the employment period, because those matters could and should have been raised in the first claim and were also out of time. Post-employment complaints about obtaining references and using them in the first claim were barred by judicial proceedings immunity, and the allegations about influencing a previous nanny employer were struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success.

The only allegations left standing were those that the respondents reported the claimant to the police in order to affect her DBS status. The tribunal held that the race discrimination, race harassment, victimisation, and protected disclosure detriment complaints based on that conduct were in time, or alternatively that it would be just and equitable to extend time, and that they had reasonable prospects of success. Those claims were not struck out and were directed to continue to case management.