Ms L Mullen v The City of Edinburgh Council: 8000422/2025
JUDGMENT
The Judgment of the Employment Tribunal is that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to consider the claim of disability discrimination.REASONS
[1]The claim was presented on 19 February 2025. The claim is of disability discrimination. It is not in dispute that the claimant’s employment with the respondent ended on 30 June 2024. It is also not in dispute that the claimant contacted ACAS on 10 February 2025 and obtained an early conciliation certificate on 17 February 2025. The claim was listed for a preliminary hearing to determine whether the claim could be considered by the Tribunal having been presented more than three months after the alleged acts of discrimination. The preliminary hearing was listed for 15 April 2025. The claimant represented herself. The respondent was represented by Ms A Drummond, Solicitor.[2]During her evidence, the claimant referred to conversations that she claimed to have had with employees of the respondent about the most appropriate time to present a claim. This was not something to which the claimant had previously referred in the Tribunal proceedings and it was considered appropriate to allow the respondent an opportunity to take instructions and consider whether they wished to call any of the employees in question to give evidence. The preliminary hearing was continued to 12 May 2025.[3]In advance of today’s hearing, the respondent contacted the Tribunal to confirm that they did not wish to contest or present a defence in relation to timebar. The Tribunal was invited to consider the issue of timebar based on the evidence of the claimant at the hearing on 15 April 2025. The respondent continues to defend the substantive merits of the claim.[4]As referred to above, the claim is of disability discrimination. It is not in dispute that the claim was presented out of time, that is after the end of the period of three months beginning with the date of the alleged act/s of discrimination. The Tribunal must therefore determine whether, in terms of Section 123 (1) (b) of the Equality Act 2010, it is just and equitable to extend the period within which the claim may be presented – in this case to 19 February 2025. Having considered the evidence of the claimant, the Tribunal is satisfied that it is just and equitable to extend the period for presenting the claim to 19 February 2025. The Tribunal has taken into account evidence from the claimant which is uncontested. It was the claimant’s evidence that until around 10 February 2025, she was advised by employees of the respondent, at least some of whom were part of or at least connected to the respondent’s Human Resources, that she needed to know the outcome of her Grievance before presenting a claim as it was only then that she would know the type of claim she may want to bring. The claimant was informed of the outcome of the Grievance on 17 February 2025. During this time, the respondent was aware that the claimant been in contact with ACAS and intended to bring a claim.[5]The Tribunal concluded that in all the circumstances, the prejudice to the respondent of the claim not being presented until after the conclusion of the claimant’s Grievance is limited. The claimant was receiving treatment for cancer during her employment with the respondent. The prejudice to the claimant of not extending the period for presenting the claim outweighs the prejudice to the respondent. The claimant will be denied the opportunity to bring a claim. The extension of time, while not insignificant, will not materially prejudice the respondent’s ability to defend the claim.[6]The Tribunal therefore concluded that in all the circumstances it is just and equitable to extend the period for presenting the claim to 19 February 2025 and that accordingly the Tribunal has jurisdiction to consider the claim of disability discrimination.