Cases1301189/2021

Claimant v Herefordshire & Worcestershire Health & Care NHS Trust

5 February 2025Before Employment Judge KenwardBirminghamremote video

Outcome

Partly successful

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalnot determined

The ordinary unfair dismissal claim (capability dismissal after 13 months sickness absence) was allowed to proceed to final hearing. The tribunal found the claim was in time and the respondent would need to address it on merits.

Discrimination Arising from Disability (s.15)(disability)partly succeeded

Amendment allowed for disability discrimination claims relating to management of sickness absence (misrepresenting reason for absence in OH referral, failure to ask why absent, failure re redeployment spreadsheet, dismissal). Amendment refused for pre-absence claim regarding failure to provide adequate support from 2017 as too historic.

Direct Discrimination(race)struck out

All race discrimination claims dismissed. Amendment to add particularised race discrimination claims refused as allegations were historic (2017-2019), evidence cogency affected, and balance of hardship did not favour claimant. ET1 failed to disclose basis of race discrimination complaint.

Whistleblowingstruck out

Amendment to add whistleblowing victimisation claims refused. No reference to whistleblowing in ET1. Claims significantly out of time. Claimant accepted particulars could have been provided when ET1 filed. No persuasive basis for extending time under 'not reasonably practicable' test.

Unlawful Deduction from Wagesnot determined

Amendment allowed to claim for failure to pay injury allowance from 23 March 2020 to 10 November 2020 which would have topped absence pay to 85%. Tribunal found no real prejudice to respondent as contractual entitlement was straightforward matter within respondent's knowledge.

Breach of Contractnot determined

Amendment allowed for breach of contract claim regarding injury allowance payment. Claim to proceed to final hearing alongside unfair dismissal and remaining disability discrimination claims.

Facts

Mrs Pilgrim worked as a Senior HR Manager for an NHS Trust from 2000 to November 2020. She was dismissed on capability grounds after 13 months sickness absence due to anxiety and depression. She alleged discrimination, whistleblowing victimisation, and race discrimination by her line manager. Her ET1 ticked boxes for these claims but provided no particulars. She was repeatedly asked to provide details, eventually doing so in August 2021, months after filing. The claims related to alleged failures in managing her absence, failure to provide support from 2017, and alleged associative race discrimination.

Decision

The tribunal found the claimant was disabled from 19 February 2018 due to anxiety and depression. It allowed amendments to pursue disability discrimination claims relating to sickness absence management and a pay claim for injury allowance. It refused amendments for historic disability discrimination (pre-absence), all race discrimination claims (struck out as unparticularised and too historic), and all whistleblowing claims (significantly out of time with no basis to extend). Unfair dismissal, limited disability discrimination, and pay claims proceed to final hearing.

Practical note

A claimant who ticks boxes on an ET1 without providing any factual particulars risks having claims struck out or refused permission to amend, especially where amendments are sought long after the claim is filed and relate to historic allegations where evidence cogency is affected.

Legal authorities cited

Selkent Bus Company Limited v Moore [1996] ICR 836All Answers Limited v W [2021] EWCA Civ 606Cruickshank v VAW Motorcast Limited [2002] ICR 729SCA Packaging Limited v Boyle [2009] ICR 1056Secretary of State for BEIS v Parry [2018] EWCA Civ 672Galilee v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2018] ICR 634Transport and General Workers Union v Safeway Stores [2007] UKEAT/0092/07Vaughan v Modality Partnership [2021] ICR 535Abercrombie v Aga Rangemaster [2014] ICR 209Cocking v Sandhurst (Stationers) Ltd [1974] ICR 650

Statutes

Equality Act 2010 s.15Equality Act 2010 s.13Equality Act 2010 s.6(1)Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 r.12(1)(b)Employment Rights Act 1996 s.103AEmployment Rights Act 1996 s.47BEquality Act 2010 s.26Equality Act 2010 ss.20-21Equality Act 2010 s.19

Case details

Case number
1301189/2021
Decision date
5 February 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
healthcare
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Senior Human Resources Manager
Service
20 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No