The employer appealed an order extending the time for the claimant to claim disability discrimination. The claimant had been suspended pending disciplinary proceedings, but became subject to severe depression, and his doctors said he was unfit to face a hearing. An adjourned hearing went ahead in his absence, and he was dismissed in January 2005. He issued proceedings for unfair dismissal in April, for unlawful deductions in June and disability discrimination in July. The employer said that the claiant, himself a solicitor, had ignored advice from his wife, a solicitor, and his own solicitors and his union that he should make a claim under disability. His delay had not been for any ignorance, but was out of choice.
Held: The appeal failed. The disciplinary hearing had been conducted earlier than it might for reasons unconnected with the proceedings themselves. Furthermore, it was the claimant’s very condition which prevented his acknowledgement of the need to bring the claim. Since the respondents themselves disputed whether the cliamant was disabled it was less easy for them to argue that he should have recognised his condition and brought his claim.
Judges:
Pill LJ, Lloyd LJ, Lewison LJ
Citations:
[2007] EWCA Civ 894, [2008] IRLR 128
Links:
Statutes:
Disability Discrimination Act 1995 Sch 3 3(2)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Robertson v Bexley Community Centre CA 11-Mar-2003
The claimant brought his claim in discrimination, but it was out of time. The employer appealed against a decision to extend the time for him to file his complaint.
Held: A tribunal has a very wide discretion in the area of whether to extend . .
Cited – British Coal Corporation v Keeble and others EAT 26-Mar-1997
The employer appealed against a decision by the tribunal that it had jurisdiction to hear the complaints of sex discrimination. The tribunal had extended the time for the claim on the just and equitable basis.
Held: The EAT set out five . .
Cited – Daniel v Homerton Hospital Trust CA 9-Jul-1999
The court considered an appeal against the tribunal’s exercise of a discretion. Gibson LJ said: ‘The discretion of the tribunal under section 68(6) is a wide one. This court will not interfere with the exercise of discretion unless we can see that . .
Cited by:
Cited – Chief Constable of Lincolnshire Police v Caston CA 8-Dec-2009
The appellant challenged the extension of time given to the claimant to begin his claim for disability discrimination.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘the discretion under the Statute is at large. It falls to be exercised ‘in all the circumstances . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Discrimination
Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.259307