Senate of Surgery & Ors v. Chaudhary & Ors [2003] UKEAT 0919_03_1712 (17 December 2003)

Senate of Surgery & Ors v. Chaudhary & Ors [2003] UKEAT 0919_03_1712 (17 December 2003)

The proposed amendment constituted a wholly new claim (Category 3) not linked to the original facts, and the Employment Tribunal erred in categorising it otherwise and failing to consider limitation; the amendment should be refused.

Citation
[2003] UKEAT 0919_03_1712
Parties
Appellants: 2nd - 6th Respondents; 1st Respondent / Applicant: Mr Chaudhary; Respondents: 2nd to 5th Respondents
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
17 December 2003
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal Appeal / Appeal Against Employment Tribunal Order Permitting Amendment of Originating Application
Outcome
Appeal allowed; amendment refused.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Race Discrimination, Limitation Periods, Employment Tribunal Procedure
Employment Law Discrimination Law Amendment of Pleadings Race Discrimination Limitation Periods Employment Tribunal Procedure

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

2nd - 6th Respondents

Appellants

Mr Chaudhary

1st Respondent / Applicant

2nd to 5th Respondents

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal Appeal / Appeal Against Employment Tribunal Order Permitting Amendment of Originating Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed amendment to the Originating Application constitutes a new cause of action (Category 3) or is linked to the original claim (Category 2)
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in granting permission to amend without considering limitation

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed amendment constituted a wholly new claim (Category 3) not linked to the original facts, and the Employment Tribunal erred in categorising it otherwise and failing to consider limitation; the amendment should be refused.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; amendment refused.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The application to amend the Originating Application is refused.