Cases2200608/2024

Claimant v HM Revenue & Customs

22 December 2025Before Employment Judge C LewisLondon Centralremote video

Outcome

Other

Individual claims

Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments(disability)not determined

This was a preliminary hearing on a strike-out application for being out of time. The tribunal refused to strike out the claim, extending time on just and equitable grounds. The substantive claim regarding the refusal to grant home working as a reasonable adjustment on 24 July 2023 remains to be determined at final hearing.

Discrimination Arising from Disability (s.15)(disability)not determined

The claimant alleged discriminatory mishandling of his reasonable adjustment request during the period 3 March 2022 to 24 July 2023. The tribunal refused to strike out on time limit grounds and extended time on just and equitable grounds. The substantive claim remains to be determined.

Facts

The claimant brought disability discrimination claims relating to events between 3 March 2022 and 24 July 2023, primarily concerning the respondent's refusal to grant home working as a reasonable adjustment on 24 July 2023. The claimant appealed on 3 August 2023, with the appeal rejected on 12 September 2023. He lodged a grievance on 10 November 2023. The claimant notified ACAS on 4 December 2023, at least 12 weeks late, believing he could count the time from the appeal outcome. He had trade union advice but no legal advice and did not realise he was out of time.

Decision

The tribunal refused to strike out the claims as out of time, extending time on just and equitable grounds. The judge found no prejudice to the respondent, noting the claim was only 12 weeks late and the respondent was already aware of the complaints through the appeal and grievance. The claimant had a reasonable but mistaken belief about the time limit. The judge also noted the respondent's own delays in handling the reasonable adjustment request and grievance.

Practical note

A tribunal may extend time on just and equitable grounds in discrimination cases where there is no prejudice to the respondent, the claimant had a reasonable misunderstanding about time limits, and the claim has merit, particularly where the respondent's own delays contributed to the passage of time.

Legal authorities cited

Case details

Case number
2200608/2024
Decision date
22 December 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
public sector
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No