Roddis v Sheffield Hallam University EA-2019-001028-VP

Appeal against decision that certain paragraphs of further particulars of claim provided by the Claimant, following a previous order, were new matters requiring an application to amend, rather than further particulars of the claim already made.

This appeal was the latest in a lengthy litigation between the parties arising from claims in 2012 that he was being treated differently as a part-time lecturer. In advance of a 2019 preliminary hearing the Claimant’s solicitors sent Further and Better Particulars which set out observations about pay differentials and comparators together with a revised schedule of loss. The respondents countered that these amendments should not be permitted following Selkent Bus as they were materially new factual allegations not forming part of the existing claim. The employment judge agreed.

Mathew Gullick, sitting as Deputy Judge of the High Court allowed the appeal against the Employment Tribunal’s decision to refuse permission to amend the paragraphs. He reasoned that, applying Vaughan v Modality Partnership, the Employment Tribunal had treated the fact that the Claimant was raising new allegations as decisive rather than balancing the relative injustice and hardship of allowing or refusing the amendments. He remitted the application to amend to a differently constituted Employment Tribunal for rehearing.

https://www.gov.uk/employment-appeal-tribunal-decisions/mr-p-roddis-v-sheffiled-hallam-university-ea-2019-001028-vp-formerly-ukeat-slash-0060-slash-20-slash-vp

Published: 04/10/2021 14:02

message