Mr G Dinn v Keys Child Care (holdings) Limited — 2024

At the preliminary hearing on 5 April 2024, the tribunal dealt with time-limit issues, strike-out questions and an amendment application arising from Mr Dinn's claims against Keys Child Care (Holdings) Limited. It first held that the constructive unfair dismissal claim was out of time. Mr Dinn resigned on 30 January 2023, but did not start ACAS Early Conciliation until 22 May 2023 and did not present his ET1 until 4 July 2023. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for him to have acted in time and did not accept that he believed he could not approach ACAS or present a claim while internal procedures were ongoing.

The tribunal then considered the direct sex discrimination complaints, which it treated as complaints arising from events in summer 2022 involving AN and the respondent's response to Mr Dinn's concerns about her conduct. It accepted that the complaints were about nine months late and refused to extend time on a just and equitable basis. In reaching that conclusion, it took account of the length of the delay, Mr Dinn's access to a union for part of the relevant period, his access to the internet, his familiarity with employment-law issues, and inconsistencies in his evidence about what had been said and why he said it was discriminatory.

On the protected disclosure complaints, the tribunal struck out detriments 3, 5 and 6 under rule 37. It accepted Ms Ray's evidence that she, not managers, redacted the subject access request documents and that any delay in the SAR process was due to her workload and the redaction exercise. It held that the grievance appeal delay allegation lacked a factual basis because Mr Dinn had not identified who interfered with the process or how, and that the allegation about false information to the appeal investigator failed because the grievance appeal outcome did not refer to bullying as alleged.

The tribunal dismissed detriments 1, 2, 3A and 4 as out of time. Detriment 1 concerned a reference to We Are Nugent stating that Mr Dinn was under investigation for a non-safeguarding matter; detriment 2 concerned the alleged delay in dealing with the subject access request; detriment 3A concerned alleged delay in the grievance process; and detriment 4 concerned alleged false information given to the grievance investigator. The tribunal also allowed an amendment to add two later reference-based detriment complaints said to arise in August 2023 and October 2023, and recorded that those proposed additions were the subject of a separate deposit order. No remedy was awarded in this judgment.