Cases2305118/2023

Claimant v Brighton & Hove Bus and Coach Company Ltd

10 August 2025Before Employment Judge M AspinallLondon South

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

Struck out as presented out of time. Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present claim within extended time limit of 15 August 2023 given claimant's demonstrated capacity (initiating ACAS conciliation, securing new employment in July 2023). Claim not presented within reasonable period thereafter - 40 day delay explained by procedural misunderstanding not continuing incapacity.

Unlawful Deduction from Wagesstruck out

Struck out as presented out of time on same basis as unfair dismissal claim. Claimant failed to satisfy tribunal it was not reasonably practicable to present within primary time limit or that claim was presented within reasonable period thereafter.

Discrimination Arising from Disability (s.15)(disability)struck out

Struck out as presented 724 days after alleged discriminatory acts (furlough period ending September 2021). Tribunal found it not just and equitable to extend time given exceptional length of delay, weak causal explanation covering only part of delay period, substantial prejudice to respondent, and inconsistency between pleaded disability (work-related stress) and disability relied on at hearing (hearing loss).

Facts

Claimant was a bus driver dismissed in February 2023 following capability proceedings after suffering work-related stress from a workplace assault in August 2022. He initiated ACAS early conciliation on 13 June 2023 (within time) but did not file his ET1 until 24 September 2023, 40 days after the extended deadline. His discrimination claim related to events during furlough in 2020-2021, filed 724 days late. At hearing he changed the disability relied upon from work-related stress to hearing loss.

Decision

All claims struck out as out of time. Tribunal found claimant demonstrated capacity to present claims through timely ACAS contact and obtaining new employment in July 2023, so ERA claims were not presented within reasonable period. Equality Act claim delay of 724 days was exceptional with weak explanation not covering entire period, substantial evidential prejudice to respondent, and inconsistency in pleaded disability made extension not just and equitable.

Practical note

Even where mental health difficulties are genuine, tribunals will scrutinise contemporaneous functioning - ability to initiate early conciliation and secure new employment undermines assertions of incapacity to present claims, and procedural misunderstandings about time limits do not excuse delays once capacity is restored.

Legal authorities cited

Adedeji v University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust [2021] EWCA Civ 23Balls v Downham Market High School [2011] IRLR 217Ezsias v North Glamorgan NHS Trust [2007] EWCA Civ 330Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Board v Morgan [2018] EWCA Civ 640Schultz v Esso Petroleum Co Ltd [1999] ICR 1202Cygnet Behavioural Health Ltd v Britton [2019] ICR 985London International College v Sen [1993] IRLR 333Pearce v Bank of America Merrill Lynch UKEAT/0067/19/LARobertson v Bexley Community Centre [2003] IRLR 434

Statutes

EqA 2010 s.123(1)ERA 1996 s.207BERA 1996 s.23ERA 1996 s.111(2)

Case details

Case number
2305118/2023
Decision date
10 August 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
transport
Represented
No
Rep type
solicitor

Employment details

Role
Bus driver
Service
4 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No