Claimant v University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust

Claim presented nearly 4 months out of time (effective date of termination 30 October 2022, claim filed 22 May 2023, primary limitation expired 29 January 2023). Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for claimant to present claim in time given her intellectual resources, previous tribunal experience, and ability to compose a well-written resignation impact statement. She could have researched time limits or brought claim alongside her resignation.

Claims relating to Spring 2018 staffing decisions (refusal to move claimant to Cumberland Unit and employment of 4 white workers in preference) were 5 years before claim presentation and were separate, unrelated matters from later allegations. Not part of conduct extending over a period. Plainly out of time and tribunal declined to extend time on just and equitable grounds.

Claims relating to Spring 2018 refusal to move claimant were 5 years before presentation and separate from later matters. For later allegations (2018-2021) regarding Ms Carr's conduct, tribunal found 17-month delay between last act (December 2021) and claim (May 2023) caused evidential prejudice. Caroline Dowse's emails deleted, witnesses' recollections faded. Claimant had intellectual resources and previous tribunal experience to bring claim timeously. Not just and equitable to extend time despite claims having prospects of success.

Same reasoning as direct disability discrimination claims. Tribunal acknowledged claims had prospects of success but found the 17-month delay after last allegation, combined with claimant's previous tribunal experience, intellectual resources (demonstrated by well-crafted resignation impact statement), and ability to bring claim alongside or shortly after resignation, meant it was not just and equitable to extend time. Evidential prejudice to respondents from deleted emails and faded recollections.

Allegations of harassment by Ms Carr spanning 2018-2021, including mocking claimant's walk, comments about smell of weed, sniffing claimant's neck, and comments about Black Lives Matter. Tribunal found 17-month delay prejudicial given deleted emails and fading memories. Despite claimant being on anti-depressants, she had capacity to write detailed resignation impact statement and had brought previous tribunal claim. Not just and equitable to extend time despite arguable merits.

Same reasoning as race harassment claims. Allegations included mocking the way claimant walked and comments about marijuana use relating to her pain. Tribunal acknowledged claims had prospects of success but found claimant had intellectual resources and previous tribunal experience to bring claim within time or alongside resignation in September 2022, rather than waiting until May 2023. Evidential prejudice from passage of time made extension of time unjust.

Victimisation claims based on protected act of bringing 2016 tribunal claim which settled via ACAS COT3 in February 2018. Same time limit issues as other discrimination claims. Spring 2018 allegations 5 years old and separate from later matters. Later allegations suffered same evidential prejudice from 17-month delay. Tribunal found it unreasonable for claimant not to bring claim within limitation period given her resources and experience.