Mr R Garrett v Bidvest Noonan (UK) Limited — 2022

The claimant was employed from 15 December 2019 to 28 February 2020, while aged 17. He complained of age discrimination and breaches of the Working Time Regulations 1998 relating to working excessive hours and being denied daily rest breaks. The tribunal found that the latest possible expiry of the primary three-month time limit was 27 May 2020, and that the claimant did not contact ACAS until 25 June 2020.

For the Working Time Regulations claim, the tribunal accepted that the claimant was young, inexperienced, and ignorant of the employment tribunal process, and that it was reasonable for him as a lay person to defer investigating litigation until the internal appeal process concluded. However, after the claim was rejected for missing the ACAS early conciliation number, the tribunal found that he had not satisfactorily explained the further delay, particularly the three weeks taken to resubmit the ET1 with the ACAS reference number. It therefore found the further period was not reasonable.

For the age discrimination claim, the tribunal considered the claimant's explanation for delay, his age, family circumstances, and the prejudice to both parties. It found the respondent would suffer prejudice, including forensic prejudice from having to deal with discrimination allegations many months after the alleged events, and took into account that the claim appeared on its face to be weak. The tribunal concluded that it would not be just and equitable to extend time, so both claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.