In person For the v Respondent — 2023

The judgment concerned a preliminary hearing about the claimant's second claim, case number 4104206/2022, which raised an allegation of sexual harassment arising from an incident said to have occurred on 9 December 2011. The tribunal recorded that the claimant's first claim, case number 2202088/2022, included constructive unfair dismissal, race discrimination, victimisation, disability discrimination, unlawful deductions from wages and race-related harassment, but those matters were not determined at this hearing.

The tribunal found that the primary time limit for the alleged sexual harassment expired on 8 March 2012 and that the second claim was just over 10 years out of time. It took account of the claimant's explanation for delay, including his reliance on depression, but noted the earlier finding that he was not disabled in 2012 and concluded he had not been prevented by disability from presenting a claim then.

The tribunal decided it was not just and equitable to extend time. It found substantial forensic prejudice to the respondent because the alleged perpetrator had left employment seven years earlier and was no longer available as a witness, and because witness recollection of events from about 12 years earlier was likely to affect the cogency of evidence. The second claim was therefore out of time and the tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to hear it.