Wolfe v Taka Mayfair Limited [2026] EAT 106
Appeal against the dismissal of the Claimant's amendment application, that the Respondent had not complied with section 10 of the Employment Relations Act 1999, as it would be bound to fail. Appeal dismissed.
The Claimant was asked to meet with the Respondent after working a shift and subsequently dismissed. The Claimant sought to add a claim under s10 Employment Relations Act 1999 which gives the employee the right to be accompanied at a disciplinary or grievance hearing. The Claimant did not exercise that right, not because he did not know it existed but because he did not realise the meeting was a disciplinary hearing and by the time he was dismissed, it was too late. The ET refused to allow him to amend his claim against the Respondent to add in a claim under s10, saying that a requirement was that the Claimant had asked to be accompanied to the meeting. The Claimant accepted that he made no such request. This meant that the statutory right to be accompanied was not engaged. On his own case the Claimant could satisfy s10(1)(b) of the Employment Relations Act 1999. The Claimant appealed.
The EAT dismissed the appeal. It is a condition of the right to be accompanied at a disciplinary or grievance hearing, conferred by section 10 Employment Relations Act 1999, that there be a request by the worker to be accompanied at the hearing in question, in accordance with section 10(1)(b). In the absence of such a request by the worker, the specific rights conferred by the remainder of section 10 do not arise. That is so, even in a case where the reason why the worker did not make a request, is that the employer did not explain to the worker the purpose or nature of the meeting, and, because of that, the worker did not appreciate that it would attract the right to be accompanied, until it was too late for them to invoke it.
Published: 07/08/2026 09:43