Mr M Williams v ATS Euromaster Ltd — 2024

This was a preliminary hearing on amendment and time limits, not a final merits judgment. The claimant, who has type 1 diabetes, said he had been required to work through lunch breaks and long hours, which prevented him from managing his insulin and was the reason he resigned. The tribunal considered the amendment application under the Presidential Guidance on General Case Management and Selkent Bus Company Ltd v Moore, and it also applied the s.123 Equality Act 2010 just and equitable test for extending time.

The tribunal accepted that the balance of prejudice favoured the claimant if the disability discrimination amendments were refused. It found that he had a long employment history, had produced material indicating the respondent knew about his diabetes and his complaints, and that relevant witnesses and documents were still available. It also noted that the proceedings were still at an early stage and no final hearing had been listed. The tribunal therefore extended time for the claimant to pursue indirect disability discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments, and recorded that he was alleging his dismissal was discriminatory on grounds of disability.

The tribunal also treated the constructive unfair dismissal point as a re-labelling of facts already set out in the original ET1. It noted that the claimant had pleaded working through lunches, excessive hours, and the alteration of documents in connection with his resignation, so the amendment did not introduce a wholly new factual basis. For the same reason, it allowed the amendment to add a claim that he suffered detriments for asserting a statutory right to breaks. The judgment did not decide the underlying merits of any of those claims; it only allowed the amendments and time extension, and listed a further preliminary hearing for issues and directions.