Claimant v Leeds Community Healthcare NHS Trust
Outcome
Individual claims
This was a preliminary hearing on jurisdiction only. The tribunal found the claim was presented in time (with just and equitable extension) and the tribunal has jurisdiction to hear it. The merits of the claim have not yet been determined, though the tribunal noted it appears to have good prospects as the respondent admitted in the grievance outcome that it failed to make reasonable adjustments recommended by Access to Work.
Facts
The claimant, who is disabled due to autism and dyslexia, was employed by the NHS Trust from November 2021 to August 2023. After an Access to Work assessment in April 2022 recommended equipment, training and coaching adjustments, the respondent failed to implement them despite Access to Work funding being available. The claimant became unwell in November 2022 and was advised by her GP and occupational health she could not return without adjustments. She raised a grievance in January 2023 which was not heard until July 2023, and resigned in June 2023. The respondent admitted in the grievance outcome that it had failed to make reasonable adjustments. The claimant received incorrect advice from Unison in early 2023 that she had no claim, and only began early conciliation on 29 November 2023, 49 days after the primary time limit expired.
Decision
The tribunal found the claim was presented in time, granting a just and equitable extension. The 49-day delay was caused by incorrect trade union advice, the claimant's disability affecting her ability to complete forms, her decision to pursue an internal grievance first, and trade union delays. The tribunal noted a 7-week delay was unlikely to affect witness evidence, the claim had good prospects of success given the respondent's admission, and it would not be just and equitable to penalise the claimant for the respondent's own persistent delays or for seeking internal resolution first.
Practical note
Tribunals should be willing to extend time on just and equitable grounds in disability discrimination cases where delays result from incorrect advisor advice, the claimant's disability, and pursuing internal processes, particularly where the respondent itself contributed to delays and has admitted the conduct complained of.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1800905/2024
- Decision date
- 6 February 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Employment details
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister