Mr H Allen v Accenture and 1 other — 2022

Mr H Allen was engaged through Guidant Global to do work for Accenture/Bow & Arrow from November 2020. He alleged direct race discrimination based on racial insensitivity, microaggressions, bullying and refusal of support by senior managers, and victimisation in relation to delayed termination payments. The hearing was a preliminary jurisdiction hearing focused on limitation, the possible joinder of the second respondent, and whether time should be extended.

The Tribunal found that notice of termination was given on 4 May 2021, so the effective date of termination was 3 June 2021. On that basis, the last possible date for pre-termination race discrimination claims to enter Early Conciliation was 6 August 2021, and the race discrimination claim was therefore outside the primary time limit. The victimisation complaint about delayed termination payments was treated as an omission claim running from 14 May 2021, but that claim also fell outside the primary time limit because Early Conciliation was not started in time.

The Tribunal accepted that the Claimant had experienced mental ill health, gastrointestinal symptoms, pandemic-related difficulties, and distress connected with racism generally, but found none of those factors explained the delay in bringing the claims. It held that his misunderstanding of the time calculation was not reasonable on the very particular facts of the case, because he had already been through a similar limitation dispute in a 2020 tribunal case and had received written reasons explaining how time limits were calculated. The Tribunal also found that the respondent emails about payment did not show he had been singled out in relation to pay.

The Tribunal declined to extend time on the just and equitable basis, finding no reasonable explanation for the delay and no other factor pointing towards fairness in extending time, even by one day for part of the claim. It therefore held that it had no power to hear the claims and dismissed them. It also refused to dismiss Bow & Arrow Limited as a respondent, noting that it was a separate legal entity and that there was evidence the Claimant had worked for it as a contract worker, although the Tribunal observed that the business had been transferred to Accenture and Bow & Arrow was in liquidation.