M Arian v The Spitalfields Practice

M Arian v The Spitalfields Practice

The tribunal's decision was unsafe due to a material error of fact regarding when the section 103A complaint was first raised, excessive focus on delay without proper consideration of hardship, and failure to properly weigh the implications of the amendment. The section 103A amendment should be allowed as it involves no substantial new factual enquiry and the balance of prejudice favours granting it. The fifth disclosure amendment requires further consideration by a different judge to assess practical implications and balance of hardship.

Parties
Appellant: Mr M Arian; Respondent: The Spitalfields Practice
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in respect of section 103A amendment; fifth disclosure amendment remitted for reconsideration by a different judge.
Legal Topics
Whistleblowing, Protected Disclosures, Unfair Dismissal, Amendment of Pleadings, Time Limits
Employment Law Whistleblowing Protected Disclosures Unfair Dismissal Amendment of Pleadings Time Limits

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr M Arian

Appellant

The Spitalfields Practice

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tribunal erred in refusing the claimant's application to amend to add a complaint of unfair dismissal for making protected disclosures
  2. 2 Whether delay in raising the amendment application was properly considered
  3. 3 Whether the addition of a section 103A complaint constitutes a new claim for time limit purposes

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal's decision was unsafe due to a material error of fact regarding when the section 103A complaint was first raised, excessive focus on delay without proper consideration of hardship, and failure to properly weigh the implications of the amendment. The section 103A amendment should be allowed as it involves no substantial new factual enquiry and the balance of prejudice favours granting it. The fifth disclosure amendment requires further consideration by a different judge to assess practical implications and balance of hardship.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in respect of section 103A amendment; fifth disclosure amendment remitted for reconsideration by a different judge.

Orders

  • Section 103A amendment to be granted and included in the claim.
  • Fifth disclosure amendment application remitted to a different judge for further consideration.