Mr J Lewis v Sky In-Home Services Ltd — 2022

The claimant, Mr J Lewis, was employed by Sky In-Home Services Limited from 5 September 2016 and was suspended on 20 October 2020 after an alleged health and safety breach. He was summarily dismissed on 25 February 2021 and appealed on 5 March 2021. The ET1, presented on 17 January 2022, ticked unfair dismissal and race discrimination; the tribunal treated both as out of time and held that time limits were jurisdictional issues it had to determine.

For unfair dismissal, the tribunal applied the section 111 ERA 1996 time limit and accepted that the claimant had initially received misleading ACAS guidance in May 2021. It found that, because of that advice and his personal circumstances, it was not reasonably practicable for him to present the claim earlier up to about 12 November 2021. However, after the ACAS early conciliation certificate ended on 19 November 2021, the tribunal found he did not bring the claim within a reasonable further period. It held that he knew the relevant position, had access to a computer, and could have filed the ET1 before 17 January 2022.

For the race discrimination claim, the tribunal applied the section 123 EqA 2010 just and equitable test and referred to Adedeji, Keeble, and Morgan in assessing prejudice and delay. It accepted that the claimant knew the facts giving rise to the complaint, that there was no evidence the respondent could not defend the claim because of lost witnesses or faded memories, and that the claimant had not been prevented from getting the necessary information from the respondent. Nevertheless, it concluded that the length and reasons for the delay, and the practical prejudice of having to investigate and defend a late claim, meant it was not just and equitable to extend time. The tribunal therefore struck out the discrimination claim and recorded that, with no claims remaining, the amendment application did not need to be addressed.