El-Kharam v Deep Pan Pizza Co [1996] UKEAT 797_96_1010 (10 October 1996)

El-Kharam v Deep Pan Pizza Co [1996] UKEAT 797_96_1010 (10 October 1996)

The tribunal chairman exercised his discretion appropriately in refusing to allow the amendment to include a race discrimination claim that was well out of time, having considered the absence of any explicit or implicit allegation of race discrimination in the originating application, the substantial delay, and the potential prejudice to the respondents. The chairman applied the correct legal principles and the decision was not perverse or legally flawed.

Citation
[1996] UKEAT 797_96_1010
Parties
Appellant: Appellant; Respondent: Respondents
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
10 October 1996
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Interlocutory Decision Refusing Amendment to Include Race Discrimination Claim
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Constructive Dismissal, Race Discrimination, Amendment of Pleadings, Limitation Period, Just and Equitable Extension
Employment Law Discrimination Law Constructive Dismissal Race Discrimination Amendment of Pleadings Limitation Period Just and Equitable Extension

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellant

Appellant

Respondents

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Interlocutory Decision Refusing Amendment to Include Race Discrimination Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tribunal chairman erred in refusing to allow amendment to include a race discrimination claim out of time
  2. 2 Whether the originating application sufficiently alleged race discrimination
  3. 3 Whether the tribunal properly considered prejudice and the just and equitable test for extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal chairman exercised his discretion appropriately in refusing to allow the amendment to include a race discrimination claim that was well out of time, having considered the absence of any explicit or implicit allegation of race discrimination in the originating application, the substantial delay, and the potential prejudice to the respondents. The chairman applied the correct legal principles and the decision was not perverse or legally flawed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.