Claimant v Primark Stores Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim struck out on two grounds: brought outside relevant time limit with no explanation for delay and it was not just and equitable to extend time given prejudice to respondent and lack of explanation; and alternatively had no reasonable prospect of success as claimant failed to identify 'something more' to justify inference of discrimination.
Claim struck out on two grounds: brought outside relevant time limit with no explanation for delay and it was not just and equitable to extend time; and alternatively had no reasonable prospect of success as claimant failed to identify 'something more' to justify inference of discrimination.
Claim struck out on two grounds: brought outside relevant time limit with no explanation for delay and it was not just and equitable to extend time; and alternatively had no reasonable prospect of success as claimant failed to identify 'something more' to justify inference of discrimination.
Detriment claims related to health and safety under s44 ERA 1996. Struck out on two grounds: claims were out of time, claimant gave no explanation why it was not reasonably practicable to bring claim within time, so time could not be extended; and alternatively no health and safety matter within meaning of s44 was identified, so claims had no reasonable prospect of success.
Breach of contract claim arising on termination of employment on 23 October 2024 was out of time. Time not extended as claimant gave no explanation for delay and it was not reasonably practicable to bring claim within time.
Unfair dismissal claim was out of time. Time not extended for same reasons as breach of contract and detriment claims - no explanation for delay and not reasonably practicable to bring within time. Additionally, automatic unfair dismissal claim had no reasonable prospect of success as no valid health and safety matter under s44 ERA 1996 was identified.
Unlawful deductions from wages claim was out of time. Time not extended for same reasons as breach of contract and detriment claims - claimant provided no explanation for delay and it was not reasonably practicable to bring claim within time.
Facts
The claimant was employed by Primark until 23 October 2024. He brought multiple claims including race discrimination, harassment, victimisation, health and safety detriments, unfair dismissal, breach of contract and unlawful deductions. The latest acts complained of occurred between August and October 2024. Early conciliation took place on 17 January 2025 and the claim was filed on 20 February 2025, meaning all claims were out of time.
Decision
Employment Judge Anstis struck out all claims. The discrimination claims were struck out as it was not just and equitable to extend time given the claimant provided no explanation for delay and there was prejudice to the respondent. All other claims were struck out as it was not reasonably practicable to bring them in time and no explanation was given. Several claims would also have been struck out for having no reasonable prospect of success.
Practical note
A claimant who brings claims significantly out of time must provide a clear explanation for the delay; failure to do so will result in strike-out even for discrimination claims where the tribunal has broader discretion to extend time.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3302738/2024
- Decision date
- 16 April 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- retail
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No