Mr D Bryan (“C1”) Mr P Sealey (“C2”) Mr S Chiswell (“C3”) v Jaguar Land Rover Limited — 2020

This preliminary hearing concerned only C3's claim. C3 had brought complaints of unfair dismissal and direct discrimination because of religion and belief, but the tribunal considered only his application to amend the discrimination claim and whether a deposit order should be made in relation to the existing discrimination complaint.

The tribunal refused permission to amend. It held that the proposed seven added allegations were substantial new causes of action rather than a relabelling of facts already pleaded. Although time-limit issues were treated as broadly neutral because they might require evidence, the tribunal found no good reason for the late amendment, noted that C3 had been legally represented from the outset, and concluded that allowing the amendment would prejudice the respondent and burden the proceedings, particularly because the proposed claims had little reasonable prospect of success.

On the existing direct discrimination complaint, the tribunal found little reasonable prospect of success. It accepted the respondent's submissions that the comparator identified by C3 was too wide and did not reflect circumstances materially the same except for religion, and that the alleged criterion of speed of response to a contravention of the Dignity at Work policy was not shown to be a proxy for the religion of Islam. C3 was ordered to pay a £500 deposit within 21 days if he wished to continue that complaint.