The Claimant accepted voluntary redundancy after raising gender-related grievances and having been given a final written warning when she did not return to work following a period of working temporarily in another team. She complained of breach of contract, (constructive) unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, and victimisation. In this appeal, the Claimant complained that the ET erred in determining the list of issues to be determined at the full merits hearing as limited to a single factual allegation, when her pleaded case had clearly included other factual allegations.

The EAT dismissed the appeal. The ET did not err in drawing up the list of issues. The matters that the Claimant said had been wrongly omitted could not be said to have “shouted out” from her pleaded case. Moreover, to have allowed such additional claims to be added to the list of issues would have been inconsistent with the way the case had been understood at crucial earlier points in the case management of the proceedings (in particular, when allowing an extension of time, and when considering an application to amend). That would have undermined the earlier case management of this matter and would have been unfair to the Respondent.