Claimant v ALPLA UK Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
This was a preliminary hearing to determine whether to allow an amendment to add an additional protected disclosure allegation. The tribunal refused the amendment application. The underlying whistleblowing claims remain to be determined at a full merits hearing.
Facts
The claimant brought whistleblowing claims relating to incidents from November/December 2022 through July 2023. At a preliminary hearing in November 2024, he applied to amend his claim to add a protected disclosure from March/April 2023 concerning an incident where his arm was trapped in a machine and safety systems allegedly failed. He said he only remembered this when he took photographs of the respondent's premises on 4 November 2024.
Decision
The tribunal refused the amendment application. Applying Selkent principles, the judge found that while the amendment would not be an entirely new head of claim and time limits were not fatal, the prejudice to the respondent was significant given the late stage, lack of firm date, need to investigate witnesses whose memories would have faded, and additional costs. The claimant's explanation that he simply forgot the incident was unsatisfactory given he had prepared a comprehensive original claim.
Practical note
Amendment applications to add new factual allegations must be made promptly and with good reason; simply forgetting an incident is insufficient justification where it causes significant prejudice to the respondent through late disclosure and additional costs.
Legal authorities cited
Case details
- Case number
- 3303910/2024
- Decision date
- 24 January 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- ALPLA UK Limited
- Sector
- manufacturing
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No