Mr Keith of Counsel For the v Respondent — 2017

This was an attended preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Ahmed sitting alone on 26 July 2017. The claimant already had claims of direct and indirect sex discrimination, harassment on the grounds of sex, and detriment due to part-time status. The application before the tribunal was for leave to amend the ET1 to add two complaints of victimisation. The tribunal recorded that this was a different application from one considered earlier by Employment Judge Camp on 3 April 2017, so the issue had not already been determined.

The tribunal applied the guidance in Selkent Bus Company v Moore [1996] IRLR 661 and weighed the nature of the amendment, time limits, and the timing and manner of the application. It accepted that the amendment was not a mere re-labelling exercise but the addition of a new cause of action based on fresh allegations. That factor pointed against permission to amend.

On time limits, however, the tribunal found the application was made within time. The alleged detriments were the grievance appeal meeting on 10 January 2017 and the grievance appeal outcome letter dated 2 February 2017. The amendment application was made on 7 April 2017. The tribunal noted that, if amendment had been refused, the claimant could have issued fresh proceedings in time. It also accepted that the ET1 had already been prepared and approved before the grievance appeal outcome was known.

The tribunal found the proposed pleading was sufficiently clear for the respondents to answer and said the merits of the amendment did not need to be decided at that stage. It also noted that the amendment would not upset the existing final hearing arrangements and that the only additional witness likely to be needed, Ms Webb, was available on the existing hearing dates. Overall, the balance of hardship favoured the claimant, and leave to amend to add the two victimisation complaints was granted.