(sitting alone) Mr G A Reid Tesco Stores Limited v Represented by: In Person — 2018

The claimant started work at Tesco's Lerwick store on or about 11 October 2014 as a night worker. He said he raised concerns about training and personal protective equipment, was later appointed a trainee manager, and eventually was suspended on or about 15 November 2016. He presented an ET1 on 13 February 2017 and paid an application for fee remission, but his claim was administratively struck out around 7 March 2017 after the issue fee of £250 was not paid.

After the Tribunal wrote to him in November 2017 following UNISON v The Lord Chancellor, the claimant asked for the claim to be reinstated and the form was received on 15 December 2017. At the hearing on 4 May 2018 he confirmed that his only claim was race discrimination, which he understood to include direct discrimination and harassment, and he confirmed that he was not pursuing a protected-disclosure detriment claim. The respondents argued that the claim was out of time, but the tribunal treated the issue as one of extending time or, alternatively, reversing the earlier strike-out.

Applying the just and equitable approach and the factors in British Coal Board v Keeble, the tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that he could not afford the fee in February 2017, noting that his wife was on maternity leave at the time. It also accepted that his ignorance of the UNISON judgment was reasonable, that the period from February to December was not especially long in the circumstances, and that the short delay after the Tribunal's November 2017 letter was explained by his need to retrieve documents from the loft. The tribunal found no real prejudice to the respondents, held that time should be extended, and concluded that it had jurisdiction to hear the claim. It ordered the claimant to provide further and better particulars and directed that the matter proceed to a further closed preliminary hearing, with possible linkage to a Watford Tribunal claim.