Claimant v Taipei Representative Office in the UK, Edinburgh Office
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as it was presented out of time. The alleged detriment was the December 2023 appraisal resulting in no bonus. The claim should have been presented by 30 March 2024 but ACAS EC not commenced until 19 April 2024. Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to have presented in time as the claimant knew the time limits from previous experience with ACAS and CAB.
Claim dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as presented out of time and tribunal declined to extend on just and equitable grounds. Protected act was complaint about sexual harassment in October 2023 and 2021. Detriment was December 2023 appraisal mark resulting in no bonus. Claimant's mistaken belief that time ran from 7 February 2024 when she learned of appraisal was unreasonable given her knowledge of time limits from previous similar claims. No satisfactory explanation for delay.
Facts
Claimant employed as Administrative Assistant since March 2012. In December 2023 she received a poor performance appraisal which resulted in no annual bonus payment in January 2024. She learned of this on 7 February 2024 in discussion with HR. She had previously complained about sexual harassment in October 2023 and 2021. She brought whistleblowing and victimisation claims alleging the poor appraisal was retaliation. The claims were presented on 28 June 2024 after ACAS EC commenced on 19 April 2024.
Decision
Tribunal dismissed both claims for lack of jurisdiction as they were presented out of time. The claims should have been presented by 30 March 2024 as the detriment occurred in December 2023. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present in time and not just and equitable to extend time. The claimant knew the time limits from previous experience with ACAS and CAB but mistakenly believed time ran from when she learned of the appraisal rather than when it occurred.
Practical note
A claimant's mistaken belief about when time starts running will not excuse late presentation where they had prior knowledge of time limits from earlier similar claims and access to free advice services.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 8000950/2024
- Decision date
- 2 April 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- public sector
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Employment details
- Role
- Administrative Assistant
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No