Case 2501043/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs N Freeman v Chief Constable of Durham Constabulary — 2021
- Case reference
- 2501043/2020
- Decision date
- 16 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs N Freeman
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a public preliminary hearing in Mrs N Freeman v Chief Constable of Durham Constabulary to decide whether the disability discrimination complaint was out of time and, if so, whether it was just and equitable to extend time under s.123 Equality Act 2010. The claimant contacted ACAS on 6 May 2020, received the certificate on 13 May 2020, and presented her claim on 4 June 2020.
The claimant’s complaints were about conduct by Leanne Hogg from March 2017 to March 2018, a complaint to DI Rooney in April or May 2018, and a later matter involving DS Andrea Pescod in May 2019. The tribunal recorded evidence that the claimant had serious mental health difficulties, including depression, PTSD and EUPD, had been on long-term sickness from May 2018, and had other personal problems. She said she delayed bringing proceedings because she believed she had to complete the internal grievance process first and had been told by Unison that any tribunal claim was likely out of time.
The tribunal accepted the claimant’s evidence about the effect of her mental health and her mistaken belief that she had to await the grievance outcome before issuing proceedings. It found that Unison had not told her that she might still ask for an extension of time, and that her prompt contact with ACAS after the grievance outcome in May 2020 was consistent with her account. The tribunal also noted limited prejudice to the respondent: DS Pescod had retired, document recovery was said to be possible, and the respondent had been aware of the allegations by at least December 2019 when the grievance was submitted.
Applying the just and equitable discretion under s.123 Equality Act 2010, and referring to authorities including Hendricks, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board v Morgan, Adedeji, Caterham School v Rose, Serco v Wells, and E v X, L & Z, the tribunal extended time and held that the claimant could pursue her disability discrimination complaint. No merits determination or monetary award was made at this hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Public preliminary hearing on limitation and jurisdiction only. The tribunal extended time under s.123 Equality Act 2010 and held that it had jurisdiction to hear the disability discrimination complaint; no merits findings were made. | Upheld | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
10 references- s.123 Equality Act 2010
- just and equitable extension
- Hendricks v Commissioner of Police
- Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board v Morgan
- Adedeji v University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust
- Caterham School v Rose
- Serco v Wells
- E v X, L & Z
- Rule 37 strike out
- Rule 39 deposit order
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.