Palihakkara v Robertson Bell Ltd and another UKEAT/0028/20/LA & UKEAT/0029/20/LA

Appeal against the ET’s decision striking out the Claimant’s claim for being presented out of time and refusing her application to amend her claim. Appeal dismissed.

The Claimant worked for the Second Respondent on a short-term assignment, having been placed in that role by an agency, the First Respondent. When the Second Respondent terminated the relationship, the Claimant brought a claim against it for direct race discrimination and victimisation. The Claimant applied to add the First Respondent to the first claim, but the ET struck out the claim against the First Respondent for being presented out of time, and it did not give the Claimant permission to amend her first claim to add the First Respondent and/or to add further claims against the First Respondent. The Claimant appealed on the grounds that the ET had erred in finding that the second claim was presented out of time, and that it had erred in a number of respects in deciding whether to permit the complaints against the First Respondent to be introduced by way of amendment to the first claim and/or whether it was just and equitable to extend time in respect of their presentation in the second claim.

The EAT held that the ET did not err in declining to extend time for presentation of the second claim, or, relying on the same analysis, in declining to permit the Claimant to amend her first claim to add her proposed complaints against the First Respondent.

Published: 05/05/2021 13:47