Claimant v Heliocor Ltd and Others — 2020

This judgment dealt only with post-hearing applications. Following a preliminary hearing on 11 September 2020, a further open preliminary hearing on 12 October 2020, and the earlier judgment of 16 September 2020, the claimant sought reconsideration of the refusal to add Mr Tripathi as a respondent, alternatively to vary or set aside that decision under Rules 29-30, and separately to amend the claim under Rule 34 to add Mr Tripathi and/or Mr Hall as individual respondents in the claimant's race discrimination claim. The tribunal held that the reconsideration application was out of time under Rule 71 and that there was no basis to extend time, although it also considered the application on its merits.

The tribunal refused all of the applications. It found no material change of circumstances since the earlier decision, noted that the claimant had been fully heard at the 11 September hearing, and recorded that both Mr Tripathi and Mr Hall had been referred to in the ET1 and could have been joined earlier. The judge said there were no new material facts justifying a change in the earlier decision and, applying the balance of prejudice approach and the authorities cited, concluded that adding the proposed individuals would cause prejudice and injustice. The judgment also records that there were no express allegations against Mr Hall in the ET1, so there was no basis to add him as a respondent.