Claimant v British Broadcasting Corporation
Outcome
Individual claims
Preliminary hearing determined claim was in time as a continuing act. Respondent's strike-out application refused. Tribunal found claimant cannot be said to have no reasonable prospects of demonstrating group disadvantage arising from cancer diagnosis and its effects. Matter to proceed to full hearing for evidence.
Preliminary hearing determined claim was in time as a continuing act. Respondent's strike-out application refused. Tribunal found claimant's position distinguishable from Homer but not so clearly hopeless that it had no reasonable prospects. Evidence may show age group 52-59 disadvantaged by requirement to obtain 3-5 year qualification given caring responsibilities and time to retirement. Matter to proceed to full hearing.
Preliminary hearing determined claim was in time as a continuing act. Respondent's strike-out application refused. Tribunal found claimant may be able to prove substantial disadvantage and failure to adjust given cancer treatment effects on cognition and fatigue. Matter to proceed to full hearing for evidence.
Facts
Claimant, aged 55 and disabled by cancer diagnosis, was employed by BBC as an Accountant since 2015. In May 2019, BBC amended job criteria to require professional accounting qualifications (ACCA/CIMA) for Accountant roles, and in June 2021 created Senior Accountant role with same requirement. In September 2023, claimant was told she was ineligible to apply for a Senior Accountant vacancy due to lacking qualifications. She raised grievance on 4 October 2023 citing indirect age and disability discrimination, arguing it would take 3-5 years to qualify and was not feasible given her age (approaching 60) and cancer treatment effects. Grievance rejected January 2024; claimant entered ACAS early conciliation 6 February 2024 and filed claim 11 April 2024.
Decision
Tribunal found claims were in time as they concerned continuing discrimination in access to promotional opportunities, not just one-off job refusal. Alternatively, just and equitable to extend time given grievance delays, disability treatment, and claimant's prompt action after grievance outcome. Respondent's strike-out application refused. Tribunal held it could not be said claimant had no reasonable prospects of proving group disadvantage for either disability or age discrimination claims, or substantial disadvantage for reasonable adjustments claim. Matters to proceed to full merits hearing.
Practical note
A requirement for professional qualifications affecting future promotional opportunities may constitute a continuing act of discrimination, not merely an act with continuing consequences, and tribunals should be cautious about striking out discrimination claims before hearing evidence on group disadvantage.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1600994/2024
- Decision date
- 5 September 2024
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- media
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Accountant
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No