The Claimant was a prison officer who, in 2013, attended the scene of a murder in the prison. He claimed that the Respondent had compelled him to complete an ill-health retirement assessment application when he emphatically expressed the fact that he did not want a medical retirement. He won his claim of harassment at the ET. The Respondent appealed against the determination of the ET that the claimant had been subject to harassment and that the complaint had been submitted within time.

The EAT allowed the appeal. The ET had erred in law in failing to make specific findings about the conduct on the part of the Respondent that constituted the harassment and, if it extended beyond 20 February 2013 (the date on which the Claimant submitted an application for ill health retirement) to no later than September 2020 (the date by which it was accepted any conduct was no longer unwanted) what specific conduct on the part of the Respondent occurred and when the period over which it extended ended. The ET also erred in law in holding that it was only appropriate to take into account the period by which the submission of the claim form exceeded the usual three month time limit in determining whether it was just and equitable to apply a longer time limit. It was also necessary to consider the effect that extending the time limit would have on the Respondent’s ability to defend the claim.