ETZ 4(WR) IN THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL (SCOTLAND) AT EDINBURGH Judgment of the Employment Tribunal in Case No: 4114942/2019 (A) Issued Following Open Preliminary Hearing Held at Edinburgh via the Cloud Based Video Platform on th October 2020 at am Employment Judge J G d’Inverno Mr S Beech v Lothian Buses Limited — 2020

This judgment determined preliminary time-limit and jurisdiction issues only. The tribunal recorded that the claimant’s unfair dismissal complaint remained outstanding for a later final hearing, but it dismissed the breach of contract, discrimination and victimisation claims for want of jurisdiction. The claimant’s breach of contract and discrimination complaints both concerned the respondent’s unilateral change of his shift pattern in the last week of July or first week of August 2019. The tribunal found that this was a single act with continuing consequences, not a continuing course of conduct. It found that the victimisation allegations ran from December 2018, with the last act in the first week of July 2019.

The tribunal found that, allowing for early conciliation, the primary time limits for those claims expired before the claimant’s effective date of presentation on 8 January 2020. Although he first attempted to submit an ET1 on 23 December 2019, that submission used an incorrect ACAS early conciliation certificate number and was rejected. The corrected ET1 was accepted only after appeal, with 8 January 2020 treated as the effective presentation date. On the tribunal’s findings, that date was outside the applicable time limits for the breach of contract, discrimination and victimisation claims.

On the breach of contract claim, the tribunal was not satisfied that it had not been reasonably practicable for the claimant to present the complaint in time. It found that by the end of October 2019 he knew of his rights, had drafted his ET1, had consulted his trade union, Citizens Advice Bureau and a lawyer acquaintance, and had no impediment preventing earlier submission. The matters he relied on, including a new job, childcare, Christmas commitments and travel to Orkney, were treated as foreseeable and not a sufficient explanation for waiting until late December to submit the claim.

On the discrimination and victimisation claims, the tribunal likewise held that it was not just and equitable to extend time. It found that the claimant had the necessary information and advice well before the deadlines, had completed early conciliation by 28 November 2019, and could have lodged earlier so that any error in the ACAS number could have been identified and corrected within time. No remedy was awarded in this judgment because the adjudicated claims were dismissed for want of jurisdiction.