Ms S Malik v Harrods Ltd. — 2021

The Claimant's original claim pleaded breach of duty of care, breach of contract and unlawful deductions from wages, and also indicated whistleblowing. Shortly before the preliminary hearing, her solicitors withdrew breach of duty of care and sought to amend the claim to add unfair dismissal, whistleblowing and/or health and safety detriment, disability discrimination, and personal injury matters arising from the disciplinary process.

The Tribunal found that the original unlawful deduction and breach of contract complaints were presented substantially out of time. It found the Claimant had accepted the lower-paid Retail Operations Associate role in writing, that the reduction in salary was a variation by consent, and that there was no ongoing chain of unlawful deductions. It also found it was reasonably practicable for the unlawful deductions complaint to have been presented in time, and that the breach of contract complaint was not within the Tribunal's jurisdiction because the Claimant remained employed.

The Tribunal treated the proposed new complaints as an amendment application but refused it. It considered the proposed amendments to be an almost wholesale replacement of the original claim, substantially out of time, requiring a different factual and legal enquiry. It found no adequate explanation for the delay, considered the merits of the proposed new complaints very limited, and concluded that the prejudice to the Respondent in allowing the amendments would outweigh the prejudice to the Claimant. The claim was dismissed in its entirety.