Case 3200394/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Drake v Credit Suisse Services AG — 2022
- Case reference
- 3200394/2021
- Decision date
- 5 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Russell Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Drake
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr C Drake presented his claim on 29 January 2021 after ACAS early conciliation began on 16 November 2020 and ended on 30 December 2020. The respondent said the claim was out of time. For limitation purposes, the tribunal proceeded on the assumption that the last WhatsApp chat on 19 January 2020 could amount to harassment related to sexual orientation, so that ACAS early conciliation should have started by 18 April 2020.
The claimant said that, over about two years, colleagues made inappropriate comments or jokes about his perceived sexuality in a WhatsApp group, including messages between 6 February 2019 and 19 January 2020 likening him to Jessica Alves. The tribunal accepted that he experienced poor mental health during 2020, but it did not accept his evidence that he was so incapacitated that he spent most days unable to get out of bed. It relied instead on contemporaneous GP and Occupational Health records, which referred to lethargy, anxiety, low mood and sleep problems but also showed that he was still able to attend work until 24 February 2020 and to engage with medical and work-related matters.
Applying section 123 of the Equality Act 2010 and the just and equitable discretion, the tribunal considered the length of the nine-month delay, the reasons for the delay, prejudice to both parties, and the British Coal Corporation v Keeble factors, with Adedeji v University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust also cited. It found that by June or July 2020 the claimant had obtained legal advice from a direct access barrister, was able to discuss the alleged bullying with his GP, Occupational Health and HR, and had enough support to pursue the matter, but then delayed further until November 2020. The tribunal found significant forensic prejudice to the respondent and no adequate explanation for the later delay.
The tribunal held that it was not just and equitable to extend time and dismissed the claims in their entirety. No remedy was awarded because the merits were not reached.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harassment | For limitation purposes only, the tribunal proceeded on the assumption that the last WhatsApp chat on 19 January 2020 could amount to harassment related to sexual orientation. It did not determine the merits and dismissed the claim as out of time; the judgment states that all claims were dismissed. | Dismissed | Sexual orientation | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.123 Equality Act 2010
- British Coal Corporation v Keeble
- Adedeji v University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust
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.