Mrs Goodarzidavan v Duncan Lewis — 2022

The hearing on 11 May 2022 was a preliminary hearing on the respondent's application for an extension of time to present its ET3. The tribunal recorded that the claimant lodged her ET1 on 14 April 2021, that the ET1 was served on the respondent's Harrow office on 22 June 2021 and again on its City of London office on 22 September 2021, and that the respondent said it discovered the ET1 on 31 January 2022 before filing its application and draft ET3 on 1 February 2022. The application was granted, the ET3 dated 1 February 2022 was accepted as within the extended time, and the respondent was permitted to take part in the proceedings.

In deciding the application, the tribunal applied rule 2 and rule 20 of the Employment Tribunal Rules and the approach set out in Kwik Save Stores Ltd v Swain, Grant v Asda, Thornton v Jones, Pendragon plc v Copus and Costellow v Somerset County Council. It found that the 6.5 month delay resulted from a series of procedural and human errors connected with the move from Harrow to Sackville House and the handling of tribunal emails, but that these errors were not procedural abuse or intentional default. The tribunal found that the respondent had an arguable defence, that the claimant's prejudice from the delay was limited, and that the respondent would suffer substantial prejudice if the extension were refused because it would likely be deprived of a merits hearing.

The judgment did not determine the merits of the underlying constructive dismissal and disability discrimination claims. Its effect was confined to allowing the respondent to file its response out of time and to participate in the proceedings.