Claimant v EE Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
This was a preliminary hearing on time limits only. The tribunal found it was not reasonably practicable for the claimant to file in time (she believed her representative had filed it) and that the claim was brought within a reasonable period thereafter. The claim will therefore proceed to a full merits hearing.
This was a preliminary hearing on time limits only. The tribunal found it just and equitable to extend time given the claimant was lied to by her representative about the claim being filed, the discrimination claims relate to her dismissal on capability/ill health grounds, and she would be significantly prejudiced if unable to proceed. The claim will proceed to a full merits hearing.
This was a preliminary hearing on time limits only. The tribunal found it just and equitable to extend time for the same reasons as the discrimination arising from disability claim. The claim will proceed to a full merits hearing.
This was a preliminary hearing on time limits only. The tribunal found it just and equitable to extend time for the same reasons as the other disability discrimination claims. The claim will proceed to a full merits hearing.
Facts
The claimant was a customer service advisor dismissed on capability grounds on 14 October 2021 after being on sick leave from 2 December 2020 due to frequent seizures. She appealed unsuccessfully. With trade union support, she initiated early conciliation and a representative (Mr Kerslake) was instructed to file her ET1. Mr Kerslake falsely told the union he had filed the claim on 17 March 2022. The claimant believed the claim was filed and waited, understanding pandemic delays meant a two-year wait was normal. When she eventually contacted Mr Kerslake directly in 2024, he did not respond. She filed the claim herself on 11 June 2024, more than two years late.
Decision
The tribunal found it was not reasonably practicable for the claimant to file in time as she reasonably believed her representative had filed the claim and she was an unrepresented lay person dealing with ill health. The claim was filed within a reasonable period after she discovered the truth. The tribunal also found it just and equitable to extend time for the discrimination claims, balancing prejudice to both parties and finding greater prejudice to the claimant if she lost the opportunity to advance complaints relating to a capability dismissal during ill health. All claims will proceed.
Practical note
A claimant misled by their representative about filing a claim may successfully obtain a time extension if they acted reasonably in relying on that representation, particularly where they are unrepresented and dealing with ill health.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6003670/2024
- Decision date
- 4 November 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- EE Limited
- Sector
- telecoms
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Employment details
- Role
- customer service advisor/representative
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No