Case 8000110/2022 · Employment Tribunal
IN THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL (SCOTLAND) AT EDINBURGH Judgment of the Employment Tribunal in Case No: 8000110/2022 Issued Following Open Preliminary Hearing Held at Edinburgh on the th of June 2023 at a m Employment Judge J G d’lnverno
At the open preliminary hearing on 12 June 2023, Employment Judge J G d'Inverno considered the claimant's opposed application for leave to amend her ET1. The proposed amendment, first set out in further particulars of 14 February 2023 and repeated in the proposed amendment dated 23 March 2023, concerned an alleged exchange at a meeting on 10 August 2022 involving the claimant, David Quinn and Tope Osazee.
The tribunal held that the ET1 and the claimant's 16 November 2022 additional information did not give notice of that specific 10 August allegation. It found the proposed allegation was a new section 13 direct discrimination complaint rather than a mere clarification, but it accepted that the matter had been investigated in grievance and that, once specified, the respondent would not be substantially prejudiced. Leave to amend was therefore granted for the additional direct discrimination allegation, with the respondent's time-bar challenge reserved for determination at final hearing.
Insofar as the claimant sought to use the same allegation to support constructive unfair dismissal under s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996, the tribunal refused leave. It held that the ET1 had set out different resignation reasons, centred on the line manager/staff relationship and alleged illegal company practices, and that the proposed 10 August point would significantly alter the factual basis of the dismissal claim. The tribunal found the amended constructive dismissal basis time-barred on its face and was not satisfied that s.111(2)(b) ERA 1996 was engaged.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | Leave to amend granted to add a further section 13 direct discrimination allegation based on the 10 August 2022 meeting, subject to the respondent's time-bar challenge being reserved to final hearing. | Other | Sex | — |
| Constructive dismissal | Leave to amend refused insofar as the 10 August 2022 allegation was to found constructive unfair dismissal; the tribunal held the ET1 pleaded different resignation reasons and that the amended basis would be time-barred. | Other | — | — |
The 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.
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.