Case 3200102/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Banks v Police and Crime Commissioner for Essex — 2024
- Case reference
- 3200102/2024
- Decision date
- 17 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Martin Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Banks
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs A Banks, a police constable appointed in January 2021, presented her ET1 on 14 January 2024 after contacting ACAS on 6 November 2023 and receiving an early conciliation certificate on 18 December 2023. The preliminary hearing concerned whether her discrimination complaints were out of time and whether it was just and equitable to extend time. The tribunal recorded allegations of disability discrimination linked to Moebius syndrome and depressive disorder, and noted that one ET1 allegation could also amount to sex discrimination and/or harassment, but the formal dismissal was directed at the disability discrimination complaint.
Applying section 123 Equality Act 2010 and section 33 Limitation Act 1980, the tribunal found that the last act complained of was in April 2023 and that any claim arising before 7 August 2023 was outside the three-month time limit. It rejected an extension of time. The tribunal said the claimant did not give a sufficient explanation for the delay, had said she knew of the three-month time limit and the need to contact ACAS, had not shown how her medical conditions prevented a timely claim, and had support from her father and at some stage a police federation representative.
Because the tribunal found that all ET1 claims were out of time, it held that it had no jurisdiction to hear the disability discrimination complaint and dismissed it. It also treated the claimant's amendment applications of 4 April, 26 April and 23 May 2024 as failing or obsolete because there was no surviving claim to amend. The tribunal noted prejudice to the respondent in defending older oral allegations and said any new proceedings for further allegations would still face the time-limit issue.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The ET1 included allegations of disability discrimination, including reasonable adjustments / allowances in relation to Moebius syndrome and depressive disorder. The tribunal held the complaints were out of time and refused to extend time. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- section 123 Equality Act 2010
- section 33 Limitation Act 1980
- Robertson v Bexley Community Centre [2003] IRLR 434
- London Borough of Southwark v Afolabi [2003] IRLR 220
- Apelogun-Gabriels v London Borough of Lambert [2002] IRLR 116
- Selkent Bus Company Limited v Moore [1996] IRC 836
- Vaughan v Modality Partnership UKEAT 2020/0147
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.