Mrs A Kaur v Berryworld Limited t/a Prepworld (Level 5) — 2024

Mrs A Kaur's ET1 advanced s.13 Equality Act 2010 discrimination complaints based on race, sex and religion, together with a notice-pay claim and a redundancy payment claim. The tribunal held that the discrimination complaints were brought out of time and refused to allow a longer time limit under s.123 EqA 2010, so those claims were dismissed without the merits being determined. It also refused the claimant's later attempt to add unfair dismissal and dismissal-related direct discrimination by amendment.

On the discrimination time-limit issue, the tribunal accepted that the claimant had alleged bullying, harassment and a difficult work environment, but it found there was insufficient evidence that ill health prevented a timely claim. It noted that the claimant had been able to use correspondence in 2021 and January 2022 to threaten legal action, had started work elsewhere by September 2021, and had access to legal advice; it did not accept that fear of retaliation explained the further delay until Acas notification in June 2023 and the ET1 in August 2023. In reaching its decision it referred to the width of the s.123 discretion, the Keeble factors and the public interest in time limits, including Robertson v Bexley.

The notice-pay claim was also dismissed as out of time under Article 7 of the Employment Tribunals (Extension of Jurisdiction) England and Wales Order 1994 because the tribunal was not satisfied that it had not been reasonably practicable to present it in time; it also observed that any loss had been mitigated because the claimant had obtained better-paid employment. The redundancy payment claim was withdrawn. The application to amend was refused under the Selkent approach because the proposed new claims were very late, unparticularised and, on the tribunal's view of the undisputed facts, had poor prospects. No monetary award was made.