Employment Appeal Tribunal Overturns Barclays Strike-Out Decision in Race Discrimination Claim
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has ruled that a tribunal’s decision to strike out parts of a race discrimination claim against Barclays was legally flawed.
• public
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has overturned a decision to strike out significant portions of a race discrimination and victimisation claim brought by Washington Waithaka against Barclays Execution Services Limited. Mr Justice Swift allowed the appeal, concluding that the original tribunal’s reasoning was flawed and failed to correctly apply the law regarding conduct extending over a period.
Tribunal Decision Set Aside
Mr Waithaka, who served as a Vice-President at Barclays, alleged that he was subjected to less favourable treatment, victimisation, and harassment. The original employment tribunal had dismissed several pre-termination complaints, arguing they were brought out of time and did not form part of a continuing act. However, the EAT found that the tribunal’s conclusion, that the claimant’s case had no reasonable prospect of success, was a decision no reasonable tribunal properly directing itself on the law could have reached.
Mr Justice Swift noted that the tribunal had wrongly considered irrelevant matters, such as the absence of inherently discriminatory acts, which are not necessary for a viable discrimination claim. The EAT ruled that Mr Waithaka’s pleaded case, supported by evidence of institutional issues, was sufficient to proceed to a full merits hearing.
Delay and Article 6 Concerns
The appeal also addressed the significant delay of 15 months between the initial hearing and the delivery of the written judgment. While Mr Waithaka’s counsel argued that this delay breached his Article 6 rights to a fair trial within a reasonable time, the EAT dismissed this ground of appeal. Following the principles in Bangs v Connex South Eastern Limited, Mr Justice Swift determined that the delay did not amount to a freestanding serious procedural error, although he acknowledged the delay was regrettable.
Next Steps
Although the EAT indicated that it would have upheld the tribunal’s refusal to extend time for the claim had it been necessary, the success of the appeal on the continuing act issue means the entire case will now proceed to a full hearing on its merits. The matter has been remitted to an employment tribunal for this purpose.
Read the entire judgment here: Washington Waithaka v Barclays Execution Services Limited [2026] EAT 105
