Mr J Fyfe v Arcadis Human Resources Limited — 2020

Mr Fyfe's underlying case was described as involving breach of contract and age discrimination, but this hearing did not decide those claims. The issue before the tribunal was Arcadis Human Resources Limited's application for permission to present an ET3 after the time limit had expired, following a final hearing that was converted into a telephone preliminary hearing to deal with that application.

The respondent said it did not become aware of the claim until 15 July 2020, when it received an email from the claimant serving documents for the final hearing, and that it had no record of earlier notification despite an operational post room and enquiries of its in-house legal team. The claimant opposed the application and said the respondent had been aware of the ACAS process and should have been looking out for the claim.

Applying the discretionary approach discussed in Grant v ASDA Stores and Kwik Save v Swain, the tribunal accepted the respondent's explanation in the circumstances of the initial Covid-19 lockdown period. It found there was no evidence that the respondent's account of non-receipt was false or mistaken, and that the respondent had acted swiftly once it became aware of the claim. The tribunal concluded that the balance of prejudice and the interests of justice favoured allowing the extension because the claimant would still be able to prove his case at a later date, while refusing the extension would prevent the respondent from defending serious allegations.

The tribunal therefore allowed the late ET3 and ordered that the ET3 presented with the application be accepted as received on 16 July 2020. It then gave further case management orders for the conduct of the case.