Pregnancy discrimination claims dismissed as out of time: a lesson in tribunal deadlines
An operator at Derby City Council had her pregnancy discrimination and harassment claims dismissed because they were brought too late, despite the tribunal finding some treatment was unfavourable.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as an operator in the facilities management department from June 2017 to October 2021.
- She notified her manager of her pregnancy in June 2019 and requested a minor adjustment to her working hours in August 2019.
- The adjustment was not granted until 3 October 2019, after a delay of over five weeks.
- The claimant raised a grievance on 4 November 2019 alleging bullying, harassment, and discrimination.
- All alleged acts of discrimination and harassment occurred before 14 May 2021, the primary limitation date.
- The tribunal found that the delay in adjusting working hours and the referral to occupational health without consultation were unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy, but these claims were out of time.
Timeline
-
Claimant notifies manager of pregnancy
The claimant informed her manager, Helen Higginbottom, that she was pregnant.
-
Request to adjust working hours
The claimant emailed a request to change her working hours from finishing at 18:30 to 18:00 due to pregnancy-related tiredness.
-
Occupational health referral without consultation
Helen Higginbottom referred the claimant to occupational health without discussing the referral form with her first.
-
Meeting to discuss working hours
A meeting was held with the claimant, Sandra Flannery, Helen Higginbottom, and a union rep. Both the claimant and Higginbottom spoke over each other.
-
Working hours adjustment approved
Sandra Flannery wrote to the claimant approving the change to finish at 18:00 until the start of maternity leave.
-
One-to-one meeting and alleged harassment
During a meeting, Helen Higginbottom questioned the claimant about her trousers. The claimant alleged Higginbottom leaned under the table to inspect them. The tribunal did not find this occurred.
-
First grievance submitted
The claimant submitted a grievance alleging bullying, harassment, and pregnancy discrimination.
-
First grievance outcome
Sandra Flannery issued a grievance outcome letter, not upholding the allegations of bullying, harassment, or discrimination.
-
Claimant commences maternity leave
The claimant started her maternity leave.
-
Maternity leave ends
The claimant's maternity leave ended, but she remained on sick leave until returning to a new role on 4 October 2021.
-
Second grievance outcome
Steve Caplan partially upheld the grievance regarding the delay in adjusting working hours but did not uphold other allegations.
-
Grievance appeal hearing
Simon Riley heard the claimant's appeal. He admitted he had not read all grievance paperwork to ensure independence.
-
Grievance appeal outcome
Simon Riley issued the appeal outcome, upholding the claimant's complaint about lack of contact during maternity leave but not finding discrimination.
-
ACAS early conciliation commenced
The claimant started early conciliation with ACAS.
-
ET1 presented
The claimant presented her claim to the employment tribunal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's claims of pregnancy and maternity discrimination, victimisation, and sexual harassment were brought within the statutory time limit (three months from the last act), and if not, whether it was just and equitable to extend that time.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims because they were brought outside the statutory time limit.
- The tribunal found that the delay in adjusting working hours and the referral to occupational health without consultation were unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy, but these acts occurred in 2019, well before the primary limitation date of 14 May 2021.
- The claimant did not present her claim until August 2021, and the tribunal decided it was not just and equitable to extend time, given the length of delay and lack of exceptional circumstances.
- No compensation was awarded as the claims were dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employment tribunal claims must be brought within three months of the last act of discrimination – missing this deadline can be fatal, even if the treatment was unfair.
- A grievance or internal appeal does not pause the time limit for bringing a tribunal claim; you should still submit your claim within the deadline.
- If you believe you have been discriminated against, seek legal advice early and consider starting ACAS early conciliation promptly to preserve your rights.
When a good case fails on timing
This case shows that even when an employment tribunal finds that an employer's actions were unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy, the claim can still fail if it is brought too late. The claimant, an operator in facilities management at Derby City Council, notified her manager of her pregnancy in June 2019 and requested a minor adjustment to her working hours in August 2019. The adjustment was not granted until October 2019, after a delay of over five weeks. She also alleged that her manager referred her to occupational health without consulting her, and that she was subjected to intimidating behaviour and harassment.
The tribunal accepted that the delay in adjusting hours and the referral to occupational health without consultation were unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy. However, all these acts occurred in 2019, and the claimant did not present her claim to the tribunal until August 2021 – over two years later. The statutory time limit for bringing an Equality Act claim is three months from the last act of discrimination. The tribunal found that none of the acts formed part of 'conduct extending over a period' that ended within the time limit, and it was not just and equitable to extend time.
What the employer could have done differently
Derby City Council could have avoided the finding of unfavourable treatment by dealing with the claimant's request for adjusted hours more promptly and consulting her before referring her to occupational health. However, the case ultimately turned on timing, not on the merits of the discrimination allegations.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a stark reminder that employment tribunal deadlines are strict. Even if you have a strong case on the facts, you must bring your claim within three months of the last discriminatory act. Internal grievances and appeals do not extend this time limit. If you are considering a claim, you should start ACAS early conciliation as soon as possible and seek legal advice to ensure you do not miss the deadline.
Similar cases
Pregnant physiotherapist forced out: constructive dismissal and discrimination at Barnet FC
A head sports physiotherapist was constructively dismissed after being investigated and having her grievance rejected following her pregnancy disclosure. The tribunal awarded £18,152.48.
Nursery nurse dismissed for discussing colleague's disciplinary: conduct dismissal upheld
A nursery nurse who was dismissed for breaching confidentiality after discussing a colleague's disciplinary hearing has lost her unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal also rejected her sexual harassment and victimisation claims.
Specialist doctor's discrimination claim dismissed after missing time limits
A specialty anaesthetist doctor had his race discrimination and victimisation claims dismissed after the tribunal found he missed the time limits and it was not just and equitable to extend time.
Late claim form costs employee unfair dismissal case despite discrimination claims proceeding
A senior customer service adviser with less than two years' service had his unfair dismissal claim thrown out for being presented 4.5 months late, but his discrimination claims will proceed to a full hearing.