It was correct to refuse to allow an amendment before the tribunal to add another head of claim which would be out of time. The presentation of a new complaint is as time barred as if it had been made separately, although, the fact that proceedings were in existence might be a reason for extending the time limit.
Citations:
Gazette 10-Nov-1999, (1999) IRLR 693, [1999] ICR 1030
Cited by:
Cited – G W Padley Vegetables Limited v A Theed EAT 10-Apr-2002
The respondent appealed a decision to allow the claimant to amend her claim for race discrimination. She had included details of alleged racial abuse, but claimed only unfair dismissal. No new facts were alleged, and the amendment would be out of . .
Cited – Swiss Re Life and Health Ltd v A H Kay EAT 11-Jul-2002
The claimant solicitor had alleged disability discrimination, but several months later applied to amend his claim, to include a claim for unfair dismissal. The respondent appealed permission to do so.
Held: The EAT was being asked to interfere . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81271
