The claimant had originally brought complaints of race and sex discrimination, harassment, victimisation and whistle-blowing detriment which were dismissed in October 2022. He appealed but failed, by mistake, to provide the ET1 form, the ET3 forms and the grounds of resistance as required and the appeal was rejected as out of time. HHJ Tayler, after reviewing the relevant case law and rules, allows the appeal stating at [26]:

"Where a claimant fails to submit a required document because of an honest and genuine mistake, this may support the granting of an extension of time. The EAT will require transparency and candour. It remains the case that an extension is not to be granted as of right. The EAT will be very slow to grant an extension if a claimant is economical with the truth or seeks to mislead the EAT as to the reason for the default. While an honest mistake in submitting required documents may be understandable, it certainly is not the fault of the respondent, so any significant prejudice to the respondent is likely to weigh significantly against granting an extension. While the key period is generally that between the claimant having been notified of the missing documents and them being submitted, the analysis might be different if there has been extensive delay that has significantly prejudiced the respondent."