Carole Scott v Fisher Jones Greenwood LLP and 3 others — 2021

The claimant, Carole Scott, was dismissed on 31 July 2020 and the claim was presented on 30 October 2020. The respondents' ET3 was due on 11 January 2021 but was filed on 13 January 2021, after which the respondents applied for an extension of time. The tribunal refused that application, finding that the explanations offered, including a wrong diary date, Christmas closure and Covid-related pressure, did not amount to good reason for the delay, particularly given the position of the fourth respondent as the firm's senior employment solicitor.

In deciding the extension application, the tribunal said it was not making findings of fact about the circumstances leading to the dismissal itself, but it did consider the apparent merits of the pleaded case under Kwiksave Stores Ltd v Swain & Ors. It noted that the respondents had not produced supporting documents and had not addressed several matters raised by the claimant, including relocation and retraining options, the asserted performance criticism, attendance issues, and the evidence said to support disability and the respondents' knowledge of it.

As a result, judgment in default of appearance was entered for the claimant on unfair dismissal, age discrimination, disability discrimination, notice pay and holiday pay. The respondents were permitted to take part in the remedy hearing. The tribunal also awarded the claimant her costs of opposing the extension application under rule 76(1)(a), because it considered the way the application had been handled to be unreasonable, but the amount was left to be assessed at the remedy hearing.