Edema v City of Sanctuary Sheffield [2022] EAT 146

Appeal against a refusal to allow the Claimant to amend his claim. Appeal dismissed.

The Claimant's claim was brought before the ET in July 202. On 30 September 2020, the Claimant was ordered to provide factual details by the EJ. There was a wide-ranging telephone preliminary hearing before him, and the judge recorded that there were “four possible claims that can be brought for race discrimination” and he ordered further information but was careful to isolate “a list of factual allegations that the Claimant must give further information about”, numbering ten, taken from the claim form and all related to dismissal. On 23 November 2020, the Claimant sent further information, and, on the following day, the ET rejected this as non-compliant. Without being asked to do so, the Claimant provided a further document of further information and a document entitled, “Further identification of claims”, which contained 62 allegations (later slimmed down to 49) of direct race discrimination/harassment and also a new allegation of indirect discrimination. The Claimant's formal application to amend his claim was refused on the basis that the EJ considered these to be new claims and not new factual allegations within the original claim. The Claimant appealed.

The EAT dismissed the appeal. There was no error of law in the ET's decision.


Published: 29/12/2022 16:40

Sign up for free email alerts

Email address
First name
Last name
Receive daily
Receive weekly
I agree to this site's terms and conditions