![CA-2025-000379 - [2025] EWCA Civ 1357](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_Sjvxvlx.png){kind=logo}
THE CROSS-APPEAL: AMENDMENT
THE CROSS-APPEAL: AMENDMENT
INTRODUCTION
By the cross-appeal the Claimant seeks to restore the ET’s order giving her permission to amend the claim form so as to enable the rejected claims to proceed. That does not involve arguing that the ET’s reasoning was right in every respect, since it is common ground in the light of Clark that it was wrong belatedly to reject the detriment claim under rule 12. Rather, it is the Claimant’s case that the amendment route which the ET took is equally available where the claim falls to be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction under rule 27.
- Heading
- Sir Nicholas Underhill
- PROCEDURAL HISTORY
- THE RELEVANT LEGISLATION
- THE EARLY CONCILIATION PROVISIONS
- The Statutory Provisions
- The Early Conciliation Regulations
- The Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
- THE EXTENT OF THE EARLY CONCILIATION OBLIGATIONS
- Langstaff P also approved observations made by HHJ Eady QC in Science Warehouse Ltd v Mills [2016] ICR 252 that, save for the obligation to provide contact information to ACAS, the early conciliation
- THE ISSUES
- THE APPEAL: JURISDICTION
- PARAS 29-30: “JURISDICTION”
- PARAS 31-32: CORE CONSTRUCTION
- PARAS. 33-34: CONSISTENCY WITH THE SCHEME OF THE RULES
- PARA. 35: LATE-DISCOVERED NON-COMPLIANCE
- PARAS. 37-38: THE AUTHORITIES
- PARAS. 39-40: DISMISSAL/STRIKING-OUT AS CASE MANAGEMENT
- CONCLUSION ON THE APPEAL
- THE CROSS-APPEAL: AMENDMENT
- THE ET’s DECISION
- THE APPELLANTS’ CHALLENGE
- Does section 18 A (1) apply to permission to amend?
- Was permission to amend wrong in principle?
- Judge Crosfill’s exercise of his discretion
- Conclusions