Daniel Matovu v The Chambers of Martin Porter KC & Ors

Daniel Matovu v The Chambers of Martin Porter KC & Ors

The Employment Judge wrongly exercised discretion by rejecting the Claimant's amendment and RFI on grounds not argued by the Respondents and contrary to his own observations, and cumulatively, his conduct amounted to apparent bias.

Parties
Appellant: Mr Daniel Matovu; Respondents: The Chambers of Mr Martin Porter KC, 2 Temple Gardens and Others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed on both grounds: erroneous exercise of discretion and apparent bias.
Legal Topics
Case Management, Amendment of Pleadings, Apparent Bias, Victimisation, Racial Discrimination
Employment Law Civil Procedure Case Management Amendment of Pleadings Apparent Bias Victimisation Racial Discrimination

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Daniel Matovu

Appellant

The Chambers of Mr Martin Porter KC, 2 Temple Gardens and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Judge erred in refusing the Claimant's application to amend paragraph 32 of the Particulars
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Judge erred in refusing the Claimant's Request for Further Information (RFI)
  3. 3 Whether the Employment Judge's conduct amounted to actual or apparent bias

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Judge wrongly exercised discretion by rejecting the Claimant's amendment and RFI on grounds not argued by the Respondents and contrary to his own observations, and cumulatively, his conduct amounted to apparent bias.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed on both grounds: erroneous exercise of discretion and apparent bias.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed on Ground 1 (case management discretion) and Ground 2 (apparent bias).
  • Employment Judge Hodgson is barred from further involvement in the Claimant's case for as long as it is pursued in the Employment Tribunal.