The Claimant was employed, through an agency, as a tutor for a child under local authority (R1) care. R2 was the agency used by R1 to provide the manpower. R3 and R4 were carers. The Claimant made claims under The Agency Workers Regulations, specifically claims of discrimination, bullying, harassment and victimisation and automatic unfair dismissal/ having made protected disclosures. The claims as against R1 and R2 were struck out by the ET as having no reasonable prospect of success. The claims as against all Respondents were struck out as out of time and having no reasonable prospect of success. The Claimant appealed.

The EAT allowed the appeal and matter was remitted to the ET. Having analysed the issue of vicarious liability between all Respondents, the EAT concluded that the ET erred in law in concluding that the R1 could not arguably be liable for the actions of R4 and that his action could not arguably form part of conduct extending over a period. That potentially put the claim against R1 within time. The EQA appeal also succeeded because if it was decided that the claim against R1 was within time that arguably was a matter that the ET should take into account in deciding whether it was just and equitable to apply a time limit in excess of three months to the EQA claims against R2, R3 and R4.