Ms Andra-Irina Nafornita v HSBC Bank plc — 2026

At a preliminary hearing on 11 June 2026, Employment Judge Drake struck out Ms Nafornita's direct race discrimination claim under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024. The judge also struck out her breach of contract complaint. Applications to amend the claim to add indirect race discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments and discrimination arising from disability were refused. The judgment records no monetary award.

Ms Nafornita's pleaded complaints concerned her transfer with five colleagues to a different team in September 2024 and later changes to her job title and duties. The tribunal found that her pleading did not set out a causal link between her race or national background and those events. Her case relied on being the only foreign national in the team, but she had pleaded that five other employees were moved with her and accepted that they were British. The tribunal held that comparing herself with team members who were not moved was the wrong comparison in law. There was no central factual conflict requiring a full hearing, so the direct race discrimination claim had no reasonable prospect of success.

HSBC had conceded that Ms Nafornita's stress was a disability from 8 November 2024 and that her gastrointestinal condition was a disability from 23 January 2025. The tribunal nevertheless found that the original pleading described her health conditions as effects of the changes complained of, rather than as causes of or factors related to those changes. It did not identify an existing failure to make reasonable adjustments claim or discrimination arising from disability claim. Ms Nafornita supplied no draft amended pleading, and the tribunal treated the proposed indirect race and disability claims as new claims rather than added detail or relabelling.

The tribunal applied the amendment principles in Chandhok v Tirkey and Selkent Bus Company Ltd v Moore, together with the time limit in section 123(1) of the Equality Act 2010. The relevant events occurred in September 2024, March 2025 and May 2025; the ET1 was presented on 26 July 2025, and amendments would take effect from the June 2026 hearing. The tribunal found no adequate explanation for the delay, regarded the proposed amendments as substantial and out of time, and held that the balance of prejudice favoured HSBC. Leave to amend was therefore refused.

The breach of contract complaint was struck out because Ms Nafornita's employment had not been terminated by either party. The tribunal held that a breach of contract claim of the kind pleaded could not be pursued in the Employment Tribunal while the employment continued. As the existing claims were struck out and the amendments refused, no claim remained to proceed.