Ms L Badham (Counsel) For the v Respondent — 2021

This was a preliminary hearing dealing with amendment and strike-out applications rather than the substantive merits of the discrimination and whistleblowing allegations. The tribunal recorded that the claimant had originally brought claims including unfair dismissal, race discrimination, notice pay, holiday pay and arrears of pay. It also recorded that the unfair dismissal complaint had already been rejected on 13 January 2020 because of insufficient length of service.

The tribunal held that the claimant did not need permission to add a whistleblowing detriment complaint because, although in unclear form, the ET1 already pleaded disclosures about safe working practices and alleged detrimental treatment because of those disclosures. The further and better particulars served on 8 June 2021 were treated as clarifying existing allegations. The tribunal also held that the discrimination amendments should be allowed, finding that the direct discrimination formulation was a relabelling of existing allegations and that additional harassment particulars should be permitted. To the extent any amendment was required, the tribunal granted it and held that it was just and equitable to extend time for the direct discrimination allegation and the new harassment particulars.

On the respondents' strike-out application, the tribunal refused strike out. It accepted that the claimant and his solicitors had unreasonably delayed in providing better particulars, but found that this conduct was not vexatious, that the claimant had actively pursued the case, and that much of the delay arose from disruption caused by the Coronavirus crisis. Applying the overriding objective and the authorities on strike out, the tribunal concluded that striking out would be disproportionate and that, taken at its highest, the claimant's case could not be said to have no reasonable prospects of success.

The judgment also records that, through counsel, the claimant withdrew claims for notice pay, holiday pay, wages and the complaint about failure to provide written terms and conditions of employment, and the tribunal indicated that those claims would be dismissed upon withdrawal. No remedy was awarded in this judgment.