C v D (PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE) [2019] UKEAT 0132_19_1709 (17 September 2019)
The Employment Judge failed to provide adequate reasoning for refusing amendments to plead harassment and reasonable adjustments, did not properly consider medical evidence or balance of hardship, and the decision was perverse and outside the ambit of reasonable case management discretion.
- Citation
- [2019] UKEAT 0132_19_1709
- Parties
- Appellant: Claimant; Respondent: Respondent
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 17 September 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Allow Amendments
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Harassment, Reasonable Adjustments, Case Management, Disability Discrimination, Sex Discrimination
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Claimant
Appellant
Respondent
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Allow Amendments
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Employment Judge erred in refusing amendments to add claims of harassment and reasonable adjustments
- 2 Adequacy of reasoning for partial allowance of harassment particulars
- 3 Whether delay and medical evidence were properly considered in amendment applications
Ratio Decidendi
The Employment Judge failed to provide adequate reasoning for refusing amendments to plead harassment and reasonable adjustments, did not properly consider medical evidence or balance of hardship, and the decision was perverse and outside the ambit of reasonable case management discretion.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- Appeal allowed; amendments to plead harassment and reasonable adjustments permitted; further submissions to be heard on disposal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment