In Person For the v Respondent — 2022

This was a preliminary hearing about limitation and jurisdiction in multiple claims. The tribunal considered whether certain Equality Act complaints had been presented outside the time limit in section 123 Equality Act 2010, and if so whether it was just and equitable to extend time. It also considered the respondent's application for a deposit order.

For the fifth claim complaints at 5.1 to 5.13, 5.19 and 5.20, the tribunal found they were between about 18 months and 5 years out of time. It held they did not form part of a single continuing act because they involved different events, different people and different periods. The tribunal declined to extend time, noting the age of the matters, the claimant's earlier decision not to pursue them, that they could have been raised in earlier claims, and the forensic difficulty caused by the passage of time.

For first-claim complaints 1.1, 1.2, 1.7, 1.8 and 1.11, the tribunal extended time because they contained clear allegations that could only properly be assessed after hearing evidence, including comparator evidence and the respondent's explanations, and it found no identified prejudice in allowing them to proceed. It refused to extend time for first-claim complaints 1.4, 1.5, 1.9, 1.13, 1.14 and 1.15, finding they were distinct out-of-time events and, in several instances, had little or no reasonable prospect of success. The respondent's application for a deposit order was refused because, although some in-time complaints appeared weak, the claimant lacked means to pay more than a trifling amount and a deposit would effectively bar the claims.