In person For the v Mr S Healey, solicitor — 2023

The claimant presented his ET1 on 21 October 2021 alleging age discrimination, race discrimination and victimisation. The tribunal recorded that the age discrimination complaint had already been withdrawn. It then dealt as a preliminary issue with whether the remaining complaints were in time under s123 Equality Act 2010 and whether it was just and equitable to extend time.

The tribunal found that the last discriminatory or victimising act contended for was 26 February 2021, when a disciplinary meeting was put on hold. Taking account of ACAS Early Conciliation from 10 August 2021 to 21 September 2021, it concluded that proceedings should have been commenced by 25 May 2021. The claim issued on 21 October 2021 was therefore about five months late. The tribunal rejected the claimant's case that the training and job-allocation complaints were continuing acts, holding instead that they were discrete decisions with continuing consequences.

In deciding whether to extend time, the tribunal applied the just and equitable test and the authorities it cited, including Robertson, Keeble, ABM University Local Health Board v Morgan and Afolabi. It found the claimant was not a reliable witness, gave vague evidence about legal advice and ACAS contact, had obtained legal advice by 25 July 2021, and had not produced medical evidence to support his explanation that pain or stress prevented earlier action. The tribunal also took account of prejudice and the claimant's failure to comply with case management orders. The race discrimination and victimisation complaints were dismissed as out of time, and the application to amend was refused.