Mrs K Foster v 1.Tower Family Healthcare and 4 others — 2021

This was a preliminary hearing about time limits. Claim 1 was submitted one day late after the claimant's solicitor first sent the ET1 by email rather than by a prescribed method. For the Employment Rights Act protected disclosure detriment claims, the tribunal found that the claimant had been represented by a skilled adviser, that it had been reasonably practicable to present the claim correctly in time, and that those detriment allegations in Claim 1 were out of time.

For the Equality Act claims, the tribunal treated the one-day delay differently. It found the delay was not substantial, that the error was genuine and rectified when identified, and that the short delay would not affect the cogency of the evidence. It was therefore just and equitable to extend time for the Equality Act claims in Claim 1 to proceed, except as against the third respondent.

The tribunal considered the third respondent separately. It found that the last allegations against him were outside the ordinary time limits, that the balance of prejudice favoured him, and that the allegations could still be pursued against the first respondent. All claims and allegations against the third respondent were therefore out of time and struck out. The tribunal also held that repeating the Claim 1 detriment allegations in Claim 2 did not resurrect them.