Edwards v London Borough of Sutton: EAT 12 Jul 2012

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Amendment
An application to amend was made which the Employment Tribunal Judge had refused purely on the basis that it involved new claims; that was clearly wrong. She should have followed the procedure in Selkent v More [1996] ICR 836 at 842, this being an application which involved an amendment which was arguable and of substance and not clearly time barred.

Judges:

Shanks J

Citations:

[2012] UKEAT 0111 – 12 – 1207

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedSelkent Bus Co Ltd v Moore EAT 2-May-1996
The claimant had been summarily dismissed. His application at first made no mention of a complaint that it had related to his trades union activities. He wrote to the secretary seeking amendment of his claim to include a claim that his dismissal was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.463766