Mr N Hutchings v The Secretary of State for Justice — 2022

The preliminary hearing considered whether there was any application to amend, whether the tribunal had jurisdiction if the claims were out of time, and whether the disability discrimination claims should be struck out or made subject to deposit orders. The claimant agreed that the ET1 contained two direct disability discrimination allegations concerning the grievance process, and that the email referred to in his agenda was further particulars or background rather than a new claim.

The tribunal proceeded on the basis that the claimant had presented the claim on 19 July 2021 to the wrong tribunal office. On that basis, the second allegation was in time, but the first allegation, arising in October 2020, was five or six months out of time. The judge declined to extend time, finding that the claimant's ignorance of time limits was not reasonable given his ability to research, his use of ACAS early conciliation, and access to union advice.

On strike out, the tribunal took the claimant's case at its highest but found nothing in the documents or the claimant's submissions linking the complained-of conduct to disability. The tribunal found no reasonable prospect of establishing that the grievance manager's handling of the grievance, or the managers' provision of witness statements for the grievance process, was because of disability or for a reason arising from disability. The disability discrimination claims were struck out.