Case 3320576/2021 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 3320576/2021
- Decision date
- 2 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Bloom Appearances
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing on the claimant's application to amend her existing claim to add pregnancy discrimination allegations. The claimant had worked for the respondent from 2 January 2017 to 6 June 2021, had already presented claims of race discrimination and constructive unfair dismissal on 15 September 2021, and later sought by application dated 16 October 2022 to add eight allegations of pregnancy discrimination said to relate to the period August 2019 to February 2020.
The tribunal applied the established amendment principles, referring to Selkent Bus Company v Moore and Chaudhry v Cerberus Security, and weighed the injustice and hardship of allowing the amendment against the injustice and hardship of refusing it. It found the proposed amendment was not minor: it was a substantial new head of claim involving new facts and a different time period from the original claim.
Time limits were a central factor. The judge noted that the pregnancy discrimination allegations were already some two years and five months out of time by the time of the application, and would still have been around 15 months out of time even if they had been included in the original September 2021 claim. The tribunal also noted that the claimant had the assistance of her trade union, had discussed pregnancy discrimination with the union, but did not raise pregnancy matters in her ACAS notification or in her two prior grievances.
The tribunal further found that there were no documents likely to assist either side and that the case would turn on the claimant's evidence and rebuttal from one respondent witness, Jane Walker. It considered that if the amendment were allowed and determined at the substantive hearing in July 2024, it would be almost five years since the events complained of, making recollection difficult. The claimant said she decided to amend in February 2022 but did not take formal steps until much later. The application to amend to include pregnancy discrimination claims was refused.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Application dated 16 October 2022 to amend the existing claim to add pregnancy discrimination allegations was refused; the substantive merits of any pregnancy discrimination claim were not determined. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Selkent Bus Company v Moore
- Chaudhry v Cerberus Security
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.