Complaint was made within time limit when the decision complained of was a reconsideration of an earlier decision, not just a reference back to it.
Held: In a sex discrimination case, where there has been a constructive dismissal, time runs from the date of the employer’s breach and not from the date of the employee’s resignation, and ‘the Industrial Tribunal, having found that the College reconsidered and looked at the matter again in 1993, erred in law in failing to consider the implications of that finding for the purpose of the running of time. It is true that the best that Mrs Cast could have achieved on this approach was a determination that the final refusal occurred on 10th May 1993. That was still outside the three months time limit, but only by three days, a trivial over-run when compared with that of thirteen and a half months if the refusal on 26th March 1992 were the only potential act of discrimination, and thus material to the exercise by the tribunal of its discretion whether to extend the time limit.’
Judges:
Auld LJ, Walker LK, Otton LJ
Citations:
Times 26-Mar-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 498, [1998] ICR 500, [1998] IRLR 318
Links:
Statutes:
Sex Discrimination Act 1975 76(1)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Cast v Croydon College EAT 9-May-1996
. .
Cited – Barclays Bank Plc v Kapur HL 1991
The bank had decided not to credit re-located employees, for pension purposes, with their previous service in East Africa. The employees had been re-located to the United Kingdom some time in the early 1970s all upon terms that their prior service . .
Cited – Owusu v London Fire and Civil Defence Authority EAT 1-Mar-1995
The employee complained of his employer’s repeated failure to regrade him, and alleged discrimination. The employer said his claim was out of time.
Held: Mummery J made the distinction between single acts of discrimination, and continuing . .
Cited – Amies v Inner London Education Authority EAT 1977
A female art teacher and deputy department head applied in 1975 to be department head at her school. In September a man was appointed instead. The 1975 Act came into force on 29th December. On 1st January 1996 she complained to the Tribunal on the . .
Cited – Sougrin v Haringey Health Authority CA 1992
The claimant alleged race discrimination arising out of a disputed grading and because it affected her pay she said it was a continuing act.
Held: The court drew the distinction between a ‘one-off’ act of alleged racial discrimination and its . .
Cited – Calder v James Findlay EAT 1989
The EAT considered the denial of access to a female employee of a preferential mortgage subsidy scheme which favoured male employees.
Held: So long as the applicant remained in the employment of these employers there was a continuing . .
Cited – Rovenska v General Medical Council EAT 22-Sep-1994
The complainant said that the respondent’s rules imposing language skills testing on doctors with recognised foreign qualifications were discriminatory.
Held: Discriminatory rules are a continuing act and the complaint was not barred by time . .
Cited – Rovenska v General Medical Council CA 4-Dec-1996
A Czechoslovakian doctor complained against the General Medical Council under Section 12(1)(a) of the 1976 Act 1976 in respect of the most recent of a series of refusals, under its rules for the grant of limited registration as a medical . .
Cited – Clarke v Hampshire Electro Plating Co Ltd EAT 24-Sep-1991
The EAT remitted a case to the Employment tribunal and stressed the importance of determining, as between alleged incidents of discrimination on different dates, when the act of discrimination ‘crystallized’. . .
Cited – Swithland Motors Plc v Clarke and others EAT 14-Jul-1993
There could be no act of discrimination under the Section 6(1)(c) of the 1975 Act in omitting to offer employment until the person allegedly responsible for the omission was in a position to offer such employment. . .
Cited – Meade-Hill and Another v The British Council CA 7-Apr-1995
An employee mobility clause in a contract must be justified, or it may be discriminatory against women.
The potentially discriminatory effect on the complainant of the introduction of a ‘mobility clause’ to her contract of employment was a . .
Cited – Meade-Hill and Another v The British Council CA 7-Apr-1995
An employee mobility clause in a contract must be justified, or it may be discriminatory against women.
The potentially discriminatory effect on the complainant of the introduction of a ‘mobility clause’ to her contract of employment was a . .
Cited by:
Doubted – Nottinghamshire County Council v Meikle CA 8-Jul-2004
The claimant was a teacher who had come to suffer a sight disability. She complained that her employers had failed to make reasonable accomodation for her disability, and subsequently she resigned claiming constructive dismissal and damages for . .
Cited – Coutts and Co Plc Royal Bank of Scotland v Paul Cure Peter Fraser EAT 6-Aug-2004
The applicants complained of less favourable treatment as fixed term workers in that they had not been paid a non-contractual bonus. The employer said the claim was out of time, and appealed a finding against it.
Held: Time ran from the date . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Discrimination
Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.143977
