EAT Practice and Procedure – Amendment
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity
DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Disability
At a final hearing on 3 March 2014 in a claim of disability discrimination the Employment Tribunal suggested to the Claimant that he amend his claim and gave permission to do so to include a new claim for victimisation and two new claims of disability discrimination. The time for bringing claims in respect of these claims had long expired and the proceedings had commenced in May 2013. The hearing had already been adjourned on one occasion and was fixed for three days.
The Claimant was a litigant in person. The parties were ready for the final hearing and there was medical evidence and an impact statement from the Claimant as to the substantial or long term adverse effect of his disability (chronic insomnia) on ability to carry out normal day to day activities.
The Decision to allow the amendments was reversed because:
(a) Permission for the amendment was granted without the Employment Tribunal having required it to be formulated and particularised before deciding whether to grant permission and rejecting the Respondent’s request for particulars to be provided before deciding whether to grant permission.
(b) No explanation was given as to the delay in seeking permission as the relevant facts were known to the Claimant when proceedings were commenced.
(c) The amendment necessitated an adjournment and an extension of the hearing to five days. The Respondent now needed to call more witnesses thus extending the hearing.
(d) The Employment Tribunal had taken an irrelevant and incorrect consideration into account, namely that the Respondent should somehow have sought confirmation from the Claimant that he did not wish to make claims beyond those in the ET1.
The decision to direct a further medical report was unnecessary because it was no longer necessary for a Claimant to prove that he suffered from a clinically well-recognised illness and there was sufficient evidence of the substantial or long term adverse effect of the Claimant’s disability.
Late adjournments are to be avoided if at all possible. Hearing times are a precious commodity, not to be squandered by late adjournments. They cause expense and inconvenience to the parties and cause prejudice to the working of the Employment Tribunal system.
Serota QC J
[2014] UKEAT 0194 – 14 – 1310
Bailii
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 23 December 2021; Ref: scu.539292