Ms HA Olayiwola v Newham Training and Education Centre — 2020

Ms HA Olayiwola worked for Newham Training and Education Centre as a maths tutor from 18 April 2014 until her dismissal on 10 May 2019. In the claim presented on 9 October 2019 she alleged direct race discrimination, direct age discrimination, unfair dismissal, unlawful deduction from wages and breach of contract. The discrimination allegations were said to arise from the failure to redeploy her to suitable work and from her dismissal, while the respondent said she was dismissed for redundancy or some other substantial reason, denied discrimination, and denied that any sums were owed.

For unfair dismissal, breach of contract and unlawful deduction from wages, the tribunal held that the claims were presented outside the primary time limits and that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented them in time. It found that by 1 August 2019 she knew the three-month period was significant, had access to the internet, could have sought help from her trade union or CAB, and later received an ACAS email on 4 September 2019 stating that it was her responsibility to ensure any tribunal claim was submitted on time. Although the tribunal accepted that her emotional and mental state made it harder for her to deal with the claim, it did not accept that those matters prevented timely presentation. Those complaints were therefore struck out for lack of jurisdiction.

For the direct race and direct age discrimination complaints, the tribunal applied the just and equitable test under section 123 Equality Act 2010 and extended time. It accepted that there was some good reason for the delay because the claimant waited for her appeal outcome, her emotional and mental state contributed to the delay, and she did not appreciate the significance of the ACAS warning when she received it. The tribunal noted that the delay was about three weeks, that documentary evidence was likely to remain available, and that the respondent was unlikely to suffer much prejudice. Those discrimination complaints were therefore allowed to proceed to a hearing, with no merits decision and no remedy assessed in this reserved judgment.