Haldane v. Highland Council [2009] UKEAT 0060_08_2105 (21 May 2009)

Haldane v. Highland Council [2009] UKEAT 0060_08_2105 (21 May 2009)

The Tribunal was entitled to refuse the amendment due to the claimant's failure to progress her claim, the significant delay, and lack of sufficient detail in the proposed amendment. No perversity or error of law was established.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] UKEAT 0060_08_2105
Parties
Appellant: Claimant; Respondent: Respondents
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
21 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Employment Tribunal Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Amend Claim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Amendment of Claim, Victimisation, Sex Discrimination, Tribunal Procedure, Delay in Proceedings
Employment Law Amendment of Claim Victimisation Sex Discrimination Tribunal Procedure Delay in Proceedings

Source-derived case record

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimant

Appellant

Respondents

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Tribunal Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Amend Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal's refusal to allow amendment to add a victimisation claim was perverse
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal failed to consider relevant factors or considered irrelevant factors in exercising its discretion

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was entitled to refuse the amendment due to the claimant's failure to progress her claim, the significant delay, and lack of sufficient detail in the proposed amendment. No perversity or error of law was established.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Order dismissing the appeal