The summary below is that provided by the judge, Andrew Burns KC sitting as a Deputy High Court judge:

The Claimant brought claims in the Employment Tribunal for disability, age and sex discrimination. Following case management decisions refusing postponement of the final hearing and permitting a witness to give evidence by CVP, the claimant’s representative withdrew the claim as part of an ACAS conciliated settlement. The Tribunal dismissed the proceedings on withdrawal. The Claimant brought four appeals but all were presented out of time. The Registrar refused extensions of time, and the Claimant appealed those refusals.

She argued for extending time as delay was explained by ill health and personal circumstances. The EAT considered the relevance of the underlying merits, including where a binding COT3 settlement may render the proposed appeals academic.

Held:

The Claimant had not demonstrated exceptional circumstances justifying an extension. Her medical evidence did not establish that her health conditions prevented timely appeals, applying J v K [2019] IRLR 723, and her status as a litigant in person did not excuse non-compliance, following Muschett v London Borough of Hounslow [2009] ICR 424. Taking into account the merits when considering extension of time, the proposed appeals were either very weak or bound to fail, and in any event were likely rendered academic by a binding COT3 settlement (Aziz v Bethnal Green City Challenge Co [2000] IRLR 111).