Claimant v Liveperson (UK) Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The respondent accepted the unfair dismissal claim. The preliminary hearing concerned only the claimant's application to amend other claims, not the merits of unfair dismissal which remains to be heard.
The race discrimination claim (mispronunciation of claimant's name) was accepted by the respondent as part of the original claim and will proceed. Additional race discrimination allegations from 2015-2022 were refused as amendments due to being out of time.
The disability discrimination claim including section 15 discrimination arising from disability was accepted by the respondent as part of the original claim and will proceed. Some additional disability discrimination allegations were refused as amendments.
The respondent did not object to this claim proceeding. It was accepted as part of the claim to be considered at full hearing.
The harassment claim relating to mispronunciation of the claimant's name was accepted as part of the original claim and will proceed to hearing.
The victimisation claim was refused as an amendment. The tribunal found it had not been raised in the ET1, there was no factual basis for it in the claimant's original narrative, it was a new claim out of time, and time should not be extended.
The collective redundancy/protective award claim was refused as an amendment. The respondent had raised the issue in grounds of resistance in June 2023, the claimant had solicitors from September 2023, but did not apply to amend until September 2025. It was reasonably practicable to have advanced this claim earlier.
The claim for enhanced redundancy payment was refused as an amendment. The claimant had already been paid statutory and enhanced redundancy. The application to amend was made over two years after the respondent questioned this in grounds of resistance.
The holiday pay claim was raised only in oral submissions at the preliminary hearing with no details provided. The tribunal found the claimant had not shown it was not reasonably practicable to bring the claim within 3 months.
Facts
The claimant was dismissed on 15 November 2022 following extended absence. He last worked on 1 July 2021. He filed his ET1 on 28 April 2023 while unrepresented and undergoing therapy. Multiple case management hearings followed. The claimant applied to amend his claim in September 2025 to add numerous allegations dating back to 2016-2020, new heads of claim including victimisation and collective redundancy, and additional factual particulars. The respondent had been aware of statutory redundancy issues since June 2023 when they raised them in grounds of resistance.
Decision
This was a preliminary hearing on the claimant's amendment application. The tribunal refused most amendments, accepting only those conceded by the respondent as factual context to existing claims. New heads of claim (victimisation, collective redundancy, holiday pay) were refused as out of time with no good reason for delay. The tribunal found the balance of hardship favoured the respondent given the passage of time, witnesses having left employment, dated allegations, and the claimant's ability to have raised claims earlier.
Practical note
Amendment applications to add new claims years after the original ET1 will be refused where there is unexplained delay, witnesses are no longer available, and the claimant had reasonable opportunity to raise claims earlier through legal representation.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3304906/2023
- Decision date
- 1 October 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- technology
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister