EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS:
2002 Act and Pre-Action Requirements
Claim in Time and Effective Date of Termination
Extension of Time: Reasonably Practicable
The Tribunal at a pre-hearing review erred in law in holding that the Appellant was barred by section 32(2) from bringing (1) certain complaints of racial harassment and (2) a specific complaint concerning one particular individual employee. The Appellant had complied with step 1 of the grievance procedure in these respects. Appeal allowed in respect of these complaints. Cross appeal in respect of other issues, where the Appellant was successful, dismissed.
The Tribunal at a pre-hearing review erred in law in holding that the Appellant was time barred from proceeding with discrimination complaints. The Tribunal ought to have applied the principles set out in Hendricks v Metropolitan Police [2003] IRLR 96 and directed that issues relating to time bars be determined at the merits hearing.
Judges:
Richardson J
Citations:
[2010] UKEAT 0251 – 09 – 1902
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.402530
