Case 3309868/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Janice Trustram v Easyjet Airline Company Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 3309868/2022
- Decision date
- 8 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tobin
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Janice Trustram
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs Trustram brought disability discrimination complaints arising from a workplace medical assessment and later roster coding. The tribunal recorded that she had worked for EasyJet as cabin crew, suffered a head injury in August 2019, developed migraines with aura, and was placed on furlough from 1 April 2020. After an AXA Health aero-medical assessment on 26 April 2021 she was assessed unfit, moved to Long-Term Sick status, and taken off furlough; she was later recoded fit on 26 August 2021.
At this preliminary hearing, Employment Judge Tobin held that the detriment complained of was a single decision on 26 April 2021, not a continuing act. The tribunal found that the claim form presented on 28 July 2022 was outside the three-month time limit in s123 Equality Act 2010, and that the claimant could not rely on ACAS Early Conciliation to bring it in time because the statutory period had already expired. The judge considered the discretion to extend time on a just and equitable basis, applying the factors discussed in Robertson, Keeble, Morgan and related authorities, but declined to extend time.
The claimant's explanations for the delay, including lack of awareness of the time limits, reliance on union support, internal grievance activity, and asserted panic attacks or anxiety, were rejected or given limited weight. The tribunal found that she was an intelligent and experienced employee and trade union representative, that the medical evidence did not support incapacity preventing a timely claim, and that the balance of prejudice favoured the respondent. Because the complaints were out of time and no extension was granted, the tribunal did not decide whether she was disabled at the material time and dismissed the proceedings for lack of jurisdiction.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment refers to disability discrimination complaints including discrimination arising from disability under s15 EqA and failure to make reasonable adjustments under ss20-21 EqA. They were dismissed as out of time and the tribunal did not determine disability status. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
11 references- s123 Equality Act 2010
- continuing act vs one-off act
- just and equitable extension of time
- Hendricks v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis
- Aziz v FDA
- Okoro v Taylor Woodrow Construction Limited
- Robertson v Bexley Community Centre
- British Coal Corporation v Keeble
- ABM University Local Health Board v Morgan
- London Borough of Southwark v Afolabi
- Anyanwu v South Bank Students' Union
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.