The Claimant brought claims of harassment against two colleagues and of victimisation against her employer. In order to succeed with the harassment claims, either the Claimant needed to establish that they amounted to a continuing act, or the ET would need to grant an extension of time. At a preliminary hearing, ordered by another ET, to determine the jurisdictional issues, the ET held that the question of whether the Claimant's complaint against her colleagues should be struck out, for being out of time, was not suitable for consideration at the preliminary hearing. The employer and one of the colleagues appealed on grounds including that the ET had misapplied Caterham School Limited v Rose UKEAT/0149/19/RN.

The EAT, having considered at length the conduct of the case to this point, held that the ET, that had been obliged to consider the substantive issues arising from the other ET's earlier orders, had revisited those earlier orders in circumstances in which it lacked jurisdiction to do so. Accordingly, the ET's orders would be set aside and the other ET's earlier orders restored, and the preliminary hearing would be listed to take place before a fresh ET.