Claimant v Lloyds Bank Plc
Outcome
Individual claims
This is a preliminary hearing on an amendment application. The claim of harassment related to disability regarding conditional approval of leave request was allowed as a re-labelling of existing facts already pleaded.
Tribunal allowed amendment to add constructive dismissal claim (harassment related to disability under s26 EqA) on 29 August 2024, despite being out of time. The matters giving rise to constructive dismissal were already pleaded as discrimination claims. Time bar defence can be raised by respondent at final hearing.
Tribunal allowed amendment to add victimisation claims under s27 EqA relating to delay in handling grievance and appeal. Respondent did not oppose as claims were in time at date of amendment application.
Original claims of disability discrimination under Equality Act 2010 remain to be determined at final hearing. This preliminary hearing dealt only with amendment application.
Facts
The claimant brought claims under the Equality Act 2010 and Employment Rights Act 1996 against her former employer Lloyds Bank. On 16 December 2024, she applied to amend her claim to add harassment allegations regarding leave approval, a constructive dismissal claim based on harassment related to disability (employment ending 29 August 2024), and victimisation claims regarding grievance handling. The respondent opposed only the constructive dismissal element on grounds it was substantially out of time.
Decision
The tribunal allowed all amendments. The constructive dismissal claim was allowed despite being out of time because: the facts were already pleaded in existing discrimination claims; the respondent was already preparing to defend those matters; there was minimal additional prejudice; the claimant would have no remedy for termination if refused; and the respondent could still raise time bar as a defence at the final hearing where evidence could be heard on continuing act and tribunal discretion issues.
Practical note
Tribunals will allow out-of-time amendments to add new claims based on already-pleaded facts where the respondent suffers minimal additional prejudice, particularly when time bar defences can still be argued at the substantive hearing.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 8001169/2024
- Decision date
- 9 June 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- Lloyds Bank Plc
- Sector
- financial services
- Represented
- Yes
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor