Claimant v South Staffordshire Water Plc

This claim was mentioned in the ET1 with specific details provided. The preliminary hearing concerned amendment applications and case management; the substantive race discrimination claim remains to be determined at a future hearing.

Claimant sought to amend to include four protected disclosures. Tribunal allowed two (11 November 2023 and 28 March 2024 grievances) but refused two others (3 June 2023 email and 22 February 2024 telephone call) due to lateness and lack of causal link to dismissal.

Claimant originally ticked disability discrimination box in ET1 but provided no details despite detailed particulars of other claims. At earlier hearing stated claim was about reasonable adjustments under s20/21 EqA but later sought to amend to s15 and s19 claims instead. Tribunal refused amendment due to substantial delay (11 months), lack of cogent explanation, inconsistencies, and balance of prejudice favouring respondent.

Claimant sought to amend claim to add s15 EqA (discrimination arising from disability) complaint 11 months after dismissal. Tribunal found no mention in original ET1 or detailed 19-page witness statement, no adequate explanation for delay, and suspicion of making up complaints after the event. Amendment refused as balance of hardship favoured respondent.

Claimant sought to amend claim to add s19 EqA (indirect discrimination) complaint. Tribunal found this was a completely new complaint not mentioned in ET1, potentially several months out of time, with no cogent reasons for 11-month delay. Amendment refused on balance of injustice and hardship.