Mr H Modasia v Citibank N.A London Branch — 2020

The tribunal sat as a preliminary hearing to decide whether Mr H Modasia's unfair dismissal claim and discrimination complaints were in time. He had worked for Citibank N.A. London Branch from 4 August 2014 as an Application Support Analyst and was dismissed on 30 January 2019. He said he brought claims for unfair dismissal and unlawful discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and disability, with anxiety and depression identified in relation to the disability complaint.

On the unfair dismissal claim, the tribunal held that ACAS contact had to be made by 29 April 2019 to preserve time. Mr Modasia did not contact ACAS until 22 July 2019. The tribunal found that it was reasonably practicable for him to have presented the claim within the three-month period because he had made a subject access request, contacted CAB and friends with legal training, and chose to wait for the appeal outcome and further documents. The unfair dismissal complaint was therefore dismissed and the tribunal said it had no jurisdiction to consider it.

For the discrimination complaints, the tribunal applied the just and equitable extension test under section 123 of the Equality Act 2010 and referred to Aziz v FDA, Robertson v Bexley Community Centre (t/a Leisure Link), and British Coal Corp v Keeble. It accepted that Mr Modasia said anxiety and depression affected his motivation, but it found that he delayed significantly after being told of the appeal outcome on 17 April 2019, first contacted ACAS on 22 July 2019, and did not present the claim until 17 October 2019. The tribunal also noted that a number of the allegations dated back to 2015 and that the Respondent no longer employed some relevant witnesses. Balancing the prejudice to both sides, it concluded that it was not just and equitable to extend time, so the discrimination complaints were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.