Case 8000055/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Greater Glasgow Health Board — 2023
- Case reference
- 8000055/2022
- Decision date
- 20 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge J Young Claimant
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, who described herself as Indian for the purposes of race, brought complaints of direct discrimination and harassment under sections 13 and 26 of the Equality Act 2010. The respondent denied discrimination and argued that the claim was time-barred because early conciliation and the claim form were presented outside the three-month period.
The tribunal considered whether the alleged conduct could amount, on a prima facie basis, to conduct extending over a period. It found that the claimant had an arguable basis for saying that the allegations from May 2020 to July 2021 and the investigation outcome issued on 10 February 2022 were sufficiently linked to constitute a continuing state of affairs for limitation purposes at the preliminary stage.
The tribunal accepted that the claim was still presented outside the primary time limit. It found, however, that the claimant had presented an earlier claim in March 2022, had attempted to add the ACAS certificate number, and could reasonably have believed for a period that the earlier claim was proceeding until it was rejected. It also found that the respondent had already investigated the general matters complained of and that the evidential prejudice identified did not make an extension unjust. Time was extended on just and equitable grounds and the case was continued to a final hearing on the merits.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The claimant alleged direct race discrimination. The tribunal did not determine the merits; it found that, although the claim was out of time, it was just and equitable to extend time to 5 September 2022 and continue the claim to a final hearing. | Other | Race | — |
| Harassment | The claimant alleged harassment related to race. The tribunal did not determine the merits; it treated the time limit issue as a preliminary matter and allowed the claim to continue to a final hearing. | Other | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
15 references- s.123 Equality Act 2010
- s.123(3)(a) Equality Act 2010
- just and equitable extension
- conduct extending over a period
- prima facie continuing act
- Robertson v Bexley Community Centre t/a Leisure Link
- Adedeji v University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust
- Secretary of State for Justice v Johnson
- Perth and Kinross Council v Townsley
- Apelogun-Gabriels v Lambeth London Borough Council
- Robinson v Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
- Aziz v FDA
- Hendricks v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
- Lyfar v Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals Trust
- South West Ambulance Services NHS Foundation Trust v King
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.