In person For the v Respondent — 2021

This was a preliminary hearing on whether the claimant should be allowed to amend her claim to add whistleblowing and disability discrimination allegations. The tribunal held that the claim form did not itself contain explicit claims for whistleblowing or disability discrimination. It found that the claimant had used the form to raise concerns about the respondent’s operational practices and service users, rather than clearly pleading personal claims for detriment or unlawful discrimination.

Applying Selkent and Abercrombie, the tribunal concluded that the proposed amendments were not merely a relabelling exercise, but it nevertheless granted leave to amend. It accepted the claimant’s explanation for the delay, noted that she had acted promptly once the issue was identified, and found that the factual overlap meant the same evidence would largely be needed in any event. The permitted whistleblowing scope was confined to the disclosures identified in paragraph 19 and the detriments identified in paragraph 22, and the disability discrimination scope was confined to the matters identified in paragraphs 25 to 27.

On disability status, the tribunal found that the claimant was a disabled person within section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. It accepted that stress, anxiety and depression amounted to a mental impairment and that the effects described by the claimant, including difficulty with basic daily activities and prolonged sickness absence, were substantial and long-term. The tribunal found the relevant period of disability ran from November 2017 until the termination of employment on 1 August 2018. No substantive liability or remedy was determined at this stage.