Cases6012206/2024

Claimant v Cardiff Council

29 August 2025Before Employment Judge S JenkinsWalesremote video

Outcome

Other

Individual claims

Constructive Dismissalnot determined

This claim remains live and is scheduled for a final merits hearing. The tribunal refused the claimant's application to amend to add whistleblowing grounds, but the original constructive dismissal claim continues.

Wrongful Dismissalnot determined

This claim remains live and is scheduled for a final merits hearing alongside the constructive dismissal claim.

Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments(disability)withdrawn

Withdrawn by claimant in January 2025

Whistleblowingstruck out

The claimant applied to amend her claim on 17 June 2025 to add whistleblowing detriment and unfair dismissal complaints. The tribunal refused the amendment on grounds of lateness (9 months after claim filed, 8 days before final hearing), lack of detail, significant prejudice to respondent, and delay to the case. The balance of hardship and injustice favoured refusing the amendment.

Facts

Dr Sas was employed by Cardiff Council and her employment terminated on 24 June 2024. She filed claims of constructive unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal in September 2024, while represented by solicitors. Her complaints related to the respondent's handling of a violence at work report, delays in grievance procedures, and failure to provide organizational policies. On 17 June 2025, eight days before a scheduled four-day final hearing, Dr Sas (now unrepresented) applied to amend her claim to add whistleblowing complaints, alleging ten protected disclosures and fifteen detriments.

Decision

The tribunal refused the application to amend. The proposed amendment was substantial, not merely relabelling existing facts. It was made extremely late (nine months after filing, eight days before hearing) with no adequate explanation for the delay. The claimant had been legally represented throughout and had attended a preliminary hearing and provided further particulars without mentioning whistleblowing. Allowing the amendment would cause significant prejudice to the respondent, require an entirely new evidential basis, postpone the hearing until 2026, and breach the overriding objective.

Practical note

Very late applications to amend pleadings to add fundamentally new claims will be refused where there is no good reason for the delay, the case is ready for hearing, and allowing the amendment would cause substantial prejudice to the other party and the tribunal system.

Legal authorities cited

Martin v Microgeneration Wealth Management Systems Ltd (UKEAT/05/006)Ladbrokes Racing Ltd v Traynor (UKEATS/0067/06)Chandok v Tirkey [2015] ICR 527Selkent Bus Co Ltd v Moore [1996] ICR 836Cocking v Sandhurst (Stationers) Limited [1974] ICR 650Vaughan v Modality Partnership [2021] ICR 535

Statutes

Employment Rights Act 1996 s.103AEmployment Rights Act 1996 s.47B

Case details

Case number
6012206/2024
Decision date
29 August 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Name
Cardiff Council
Sector
local government
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No