Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd

Case Summary

The claimant applied for reconsideration of a rejection of his claim for disability discrimination and whistleblowing. The tribunal found that while the claimant had initiated ACAS early conciliation himself, his claim form incorrectly stated that his employer had already been in contact with ACAS, which was not true. The claim was rejected under Rule 13(2) because no valid early conciliation exemption applied.

The claim was rejected because although the claimant had initiated ACAS early conciliation on 16 February 2026, his claim form falsely stated that his employer had already been in contact with ACAS as the reason for lacking an early conciliation certificate. This stated exemption did not actually apply, meaning the claim fell within Rule 13(1)(d) and had to be rejected for containing an inapplicable exemption.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •Whether the claim should be rejected for failure to provide an ACAS early conciliation certificate number or valid exemption
• •Whether the claimant's stated exemption (employer already in touch with ACAS) actually applied
• •Compliance with Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 Rule 12 and Rule 13

1 of 6 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Considered at: London South On: 26 March 2026 By: Employment Judge Ramsden In the matter of Mr D Malandain v Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd Consideration of judgment reached on: 11 March 2026 JUDGMENT ON RECONSIDERATION AND JUDGMENT UNDER RULE 7(2) 1. The Claimant’s application for reconsideration of the decision of the Tribunal rejecting his Claim given in this matter on 11 March 2026 succeeds, and that decision is varied – the Claim is now rejected under Rule 13(2) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 (the ET Rules), because while the Claim Form states that “My employer has already been in touch with Acas”, that was not in fact the case. BACKGROUND 2. The Claimant’s Claim Form was filed on 6 March 2026. The Claimant claims that, whilst applying for a role with the Respondent as a Trainee Signaller, he was discriminated against on the ground of disability, contrary to the Equality Act 2020 (the 2010 Act). 3. The Claimant also ‘ticked the box’ to indicate that he was bringing a whistleblowing complaint, but the nature of that complaint is not readily discernible from the Claim Form he presented. 2 of 6 4. Section 2.3 of the ET1 Form presented by the Claimant, concerning Acas early conciliation information, was the Claimant ticked “no” in response to the question “Do you have an Acas early conciliation certificate number?”, said the reason he did not have this number was because “My employer has already been in touch with Acas”. 5. The Claim Form was referred to a Legal Officer at the London South Employment Tribunal, who decided to reject it. The reason given was: “in section 2.3 of the claim form, you have not given an early conciliation number of ticked one of the boxes to explain why you don’t have an early conciliation number”. 6. The Legal Officer enclosed some explanatory notes, and the Claimant wrote to …