In person For the v Respondent — 2023

The claimant worked for the respondent theatre company from 1 November 2021 to 22 January 2022 and lodged the ET1 on 9 July 2022 after ACAS Early Conciliation between 14 April and 25 May 2022. The tribunal held that the wages claim had the benefit of the section 207B extension until 25 June 2022, but the ET1 was still 14 days late. For the discrimination complaints, the judge treated the claimant's evidence about bruxism, headaches, pain, finances, housing, internet access and knowledge of time limits as insufficient to explain the delay, noting there were no medical records and that the claimant was able to perform busking, contact advisers and monitor the ACAS certificate.

The unlawful deductions from wages claim was struck out because it was out of time and the claimant had not shown that it was not reasonably practicable to present it in time. The disability, sex and sexual orientation discrimination and harassment complaints were also struck out because no in-time complaints were identified and the claimant had not shown a reasonable prospect of persuading the tribunal to extend time on a just and equitable basis.

The tribunal found that Ms Road, Ms Greenberry and Ms Dawson were independent contractors, not employees or workers of the respondent, so the respondent could not be vicariously liable for their alleged acts. The only complaints allowed to proceed were the race and transgender-identity complaints against Ms Clancy: the 22 February 2022 meeting was late in itself, but the judge found there was also an in-time April 2022 email after the claimant had asked Ms Clancy not to email them, so allegations 4.3.4.1, 4.3.4.2, and 4.3.4.4 were said to be in time or arguably part of a continuing course of conduct. The judge also noted that the claimant relied on Ms Beaumont as comparator and that the comparator issue may need revisiting at the full hearing.