Miss A Temple v Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust — 2021

At a telephone hearing on 7 September 2021, Employment Judge Wright refused the claimant's application to amend her claim so as to include the grievance appeal outcome dated August 2018. The tribunal also refused to admit documentation relating to the grievance in the bundle because it was not material to the issues the tribunal had to determine.

The judge found that the grievance outcome had been referred to in the ET1, but that the claimant had not raised it at the preliminary hearing on 30 April 2019 or when she received the order on 6 June 2019. The tribunal accepted that the respondent was entitled to proceed on the basis of how the claimant had framed the case at the preliminary hearing, and there was no explanation for the delay in seeking the amendment.

Applying the amendment principles in Selkent and Vaughan, together with the tribunal's case management power under Rule 29 and the three-month time limit in s.123(1) Equality Act 2010, the judge balanced the injustice and hardship to both sides. The tribunal concluded that allowing the amendment would be disproportionate: the final hearing had already been postponed twice, the parties had prepared their evidence on the basis of the allegations identified in April 2019, memories would have faded by September 2021, and the respondent would be prejudiced by having to meet a late allegation that was on its face out of time.