Miss S. Goodlace v Chase Buchanan Ltd — 2022

At a case management preliminary hearing on 8 December 2022, Employment Judge A. Beale allowed the Claimant’s oral application to amend her claim to include indirect sex discrimination. The proposed complaint was that the Respondent operated a PCP that, where a relationship between two employees broke down, the more junior employee would be dismissed, and that this would disadvantage women compared with men.

The tribunal rejected the argument that this point was already pleaded, holding that although the underlying facts were in the ET1, the essential elements of an indirect discrimination claim were not. In particular, the original pleading did not refer to the alleged PCP or to the assertion that it placed women at a disadvantage, so an amendment was required and this was not merely a relabelling of the existing case.

Applying the Selkent principles and the guidance in Vaughan v Modality Partnership, the tribunal noted that the amendment was sought out of time, around 14.5 months after dismissal, but accepted the explanation that the Claimant had been a litigant in person and had only sought legal advice the previous month. The tribunal found the balance of prejudice and hardship favoured the Claimant, considered there was a prima facie basis for extending time, and allowed the amendment. It ordered the Claimant to set out the amendment in writing and allowed the Respondent time to provide an amended response.