Mouteng v. Select Services Partner Ltd [2008] UKEAT 0059_08_1803 (18 March 2008)

Mouteng v. Select Services Partner Ltd [2008] UKEAT 0059_08_1803 (18 March 2008)

The employment judge erred by refusing to treat the application as an amendment and instead requiring fresh claims; the claims should have been considered as amendments, and the matter must be remitted for reconsideration.

Citation
[2008] UKEAT 0059_08_1803
Parties
Appellant: Claimant; Respondent: Respondent
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
18 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Judge's Order
Outcome
appeal upheld
Legal Topics
Amendment of Claims, Extension of Time, Race Discrimination, Sex Discrimination, Unfair Dismissal
Employment Law Amendment of Claims Extension of Time Race Discrimination Sex Discrimination Unfair Dismissal

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimant

Appellant

Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Judge's Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employment judge erred in refusing to treat the application as an amendment rather than as fresh claims
  2. 2 Whether the claimant should be permitted to advance discrimination claims out of time

Ratio Decidendi

The employment judge erred by refusing to treat the application as an amendment and instead requiring fresh claims; the claims should have been considered as amendments, and the matter must be remitted for reconsideration.

Court Disposition

appeal upheld

Orders

  • Application to amend should proceed as an amendment, not as fresh claims.
  • Matter remitted to a fresh tribunal for reconsideration.