Claimant v Rhenus Warehousing Solutions Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal dismissed the claim as out of time and not just and equitable to extend. The claimant alleged direct disability discrimination by association (his wife has fibromyalgia and his son has autism) relating to refusal of flexible working and requirement to work alternating shifts. The claim was brought over 10 months after resignation without reasonable explanation for delay despite clear tribunal guidance.
Brought as part of the discrimination complaint. The claimant resigned on 22 December 2023 after his flexible working request was refused. The tribunal dismissed the claim as out of time and not just and equitable to extend given the significant and unexplained delay and the claimant's failure to follow clear procedural guidance.
Facts
The claimant worked as an Operations Manager from August 2022 to December 2023 when he resigned. He alleged direct disability discrimination by association (his wife has fibromyalgia, his son has autism) after being required to work alternating day/evening shifts from May 2023. His flexible working request made in June 2023 was refused in July 2023. He submitted an initial claim in March 2024 without an ACAS certificate, which was rejected with clear guidance. Despite this guidance and further tribunal instructions in August 2024, he did not properly resubmit until October 2024, over 10 months after resignation.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the claims as out of time and refused to extend time on just and equitable grounds. The claimant failed to follow clear procedural guidance from the tribunal and ACAS despite being capable of conducting online research (evidenced by his subject access request). The significant delay of over 10 months was not reasonably explained, and the claimant's ignorance of procedure was unreasonable given the explicit instructions provided.
Practical note
A litigant in person's failure to follow clear tribunal procedural guidance, combined with demonstrated research capability in other areas, will make it very difficult to argue that ignorance of procedure is a reasonable explanation for significant delay in bringing claims.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1311313/2024
- Decision date
- 11 August 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- logistics
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Employment details
- Role
- Operations Manager
- Service
- 1 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No