Mr B Jones, Counsel For the v Respondent — 2022

This was an open preliminary hearing on a race discrimination claim. The tribunal was asked to decide whether the 2018 disciplinary complaints should be struck out or made subject to a deposit order because of time limits, and whether they could be treated as part of conduct extending over a period under section 123 of the Equality Act 2010. The judge said he was deciding only whether there was a reasonably arguable basis for a continuing act, not whether time should finally be extended at the final hearing.

Applying Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Hendricks, Lyfar v Brighton & Sussex University Hospital Trust, and Aziz v FDA, the judge found that there was a reasonably arguable basis for linking the 2018 disciplinary investigation, the investigation process, and the formal warning to later continuing matters, including exclusion from the Friday teaching programme. He considered the evidence said to show that Mr Ali Mearza was involved at several stages, including letters from Julie Eaton and Dr Geoff Smith, an email from Melanie Corbett, and the statement of Felicity Bevan.

The tribunal accepted that there was a prima facie case that the 2018 allegations formed part of a continuing discriminatory state of affairs, and held that it was not appropriate at this stage to say the claimant had no, or little, reasonable prospect of establishing that position. The issue of whether the 2018 complaints were in time was therefore left to the final hearing. No merits finding and no remedy were determined at this hearing.