Key Facts
- •Dr. Nicholas Jones (claimant) applied for a role and was not appointed. He claimed direct race discrimination.
- •His claim was submitted out of time (3-month limitation period expired on July 1, 2019).
- •The respondent (Public Health England) did not inform the claimant of the outcome until July 3, 2019.
- •The claimant sought information about the successful candidate's ethnicity, which the respondent initially withheld citing GDPR.
- •The claimant initiated ACAS early conciliation on September 30, 2019, and filed his claim on October 29, 2019.
- •The Employment Tribunal (ET) dismissed the claim on merit and for being out of time.
- •The ET found the claimant had sufficient information to file a claim by July 3, 2019.
- •The EAT considered whether the ET erred in refusing to extend the time limit on just and equitable grounds.
- •The successful candidate was white.
Legal Principles
Employment Tribunals have a wide discretion to extend time limits for claims on just and equitable grounds under section 123 of the Equality Act 2010.
Equality Act 2010, section 123
Appellate courts should be slow to interfere with an Employment Tribunal's exercise of discretion unless there is an error of law or principle, or the decision is plainly wrong.
Bexley Community Centre v Robertson [2003] EWCA Civ 576, Caston [2009] EWCA Civ 1298, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board v Morgan [2018] EWCA Civ 640
In considering just and equitable extension, relevant factors include the length and reasons for delay, and prejudice to the respondent.
Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board v Morgan [2018] EWCA Civ 640
Knowledge of a comparator's race may be relevant when considering an extension of time.
Barnes v Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Clarke v Hampshire Electroplating
Outcomes
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) dismissed the appeal.
The EAT found that the Employment Tribunal did not err in refusing to extend time. The claimant had sufficient information to file a claim by July 3, 2019, and the delay was not justified by the information-gathering exercise regarding the successful candidate's race. The ET considered the relevant factors and exercised its discretion within the permissible range.