In person v Mr J Sykes, consultant lawyer — 2022

At this preliminary hearing on 14 June 2022, Employment Judge Ayre dealt with strike out and amendment issues only. The claimant, who was in person, withdrew his holiday pay claim after saying he had already received the money, and withdrew the unfair dismissal claim after confirming that the claim form's reference to 'unlawful dismissal' meant unfair dismissal and accepting that he did not have sufficient service to pursue it. He also withdrew several other complaints that the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear.

The tribunal then considered the remaining discrimination and victimisation complaints. The claimant said he had been dismissed because he supported his wife in her Employment Tribunal claim and because of his marital status. The respondent's case was that his assignment was terminated because of unsatisfactory and dangerous workplace conduct after two dangerous accidents on consecutive days. Applying the usual caution against striking out fact-sensitive discrimination claims, and taking the claimant's case at its highest, the tribunal held that the reasons for the termination could not be resolved without evidence. It therefore refused the application to strike out the victimisation claim and the discrimination complaint.

On the direct discrimination complaint, the tribunal accepted that the claim form did not identify marital status or refer to the claimant's wife, so the complaint needed to be formally amended to be pursued as direct discrimination on the ground of marital status. Applying the Selkent factors and the balance of injustice and hardship, the tribunal treated the point as a relabelling of an existing discrimination claim rather than the introduction of a new factual case. It found the original claim had been presented in time, the application was made early, and the respondent would not need substantially different evidence, so leave to amend was granted.