Claimant v Mizuho International plc
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim dismissed as presented out of time. The tribunal refused to extend time under the just and equitable test due to the exceptionally long delay of over 7 years, significant prejudice to the respondent in testing witness recollection after 9 years, and the considerable difficulty the claimant would face in establishing the respondent's constructive knowledge of disability in April 2013 given contemporaneous documents showed the claimant was perceived as personable and his rudeness on a phone call surprised the respondent.
Claim of discrimination arising from disability under s.15 EqA 2010 dismissed as presented out of time. Even assuming the job offer was withdrawn because of behaviour arising from the claimant's ASD, contemporaneous documents showed the respondent perceived the claimant as personable and well-liked, making it very difficult to establish the respondent had constructive knowledge of disability. The tribunal found it counter-intuitive that the respondent should have inferred disability in 2013 when the claimant himself did not understand his behaviour was disability-related until late 2020.
Facts
The claimant, who has autistic spectrum disorder (ASD), applied for a trader position with the respondent in March 2013. He was interviewed and impressed interviewers who described him as personable and friendly. A job offer was made on 20 March 2013. During negotiations, the claimant behaved abruptly during a phone call with HR. The respondent withdrew the offer on 2 April 2013, citing the claimant's behaviour. The claimant was diagnosed with ASD in 2019 and only realised its significance in late 2020, at which point he brought claims of direct discrimination and discrimination arising from disability.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the claims as presented out of time, refusing to extend time on just and equitable grounds. Although accepting the claimant's explanation for the 7+ year delay and the significant prejudice to him, the tribunal found the respondent would face significant prejudice due to faded witness memories after 9 years, and that the claim had weak merits because contemporaneous documents showed the respondent perceived the claimant as personable and his rudeness surprised them, making constructive knowledge of disability very difficult to establish.
Practical note
Even where a claimant has a credible explanation for very long delay in bringing a disability discrimination claim, tribunals will refuse to extend time where contemporaneous documents strongly undermine the claim and significant prejudice to the respondent arises from faded witness memories.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2207164/2020
- Decision date
- 6 October 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- financial services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- trader
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No