Log in to become a member of Susheel Bellara's Fan Club!
Employees wishing to take their claims to the Employment Tribunals have for many years been faced with a range of administrative and legal hurdles. Jurisdiction and time limits have been the main barriers for employees who wish to put their case before the Tribunal and many are often left sitting in frustration simply because they have left it too late or not followed the proper procedures. Some have even got their claims through but have been left with nothing more than moral victories due to not setting out their claims in full at the outset. The claim form (ET1) which is submitted to the Employment Tribunal is a vital tool and will often act as the base for any complaint. Those who feel they have been discriminated against because of sex or race sometimes fail to even mention it on the claim form. Attempts to raise these matters later in the day is often a futile task and no doubt leaves the employer with perfect ammunition to galvanise any defence.
However, the Employment Appeal Tribunal recently provided some comfort to both legal representatives and employees on the issue of detailing complaints in a claim form in the case of Golding v Southfields Community College UKEAT/0395/06/RN
Mrs Golding, a school admissions officer, alleged that she was dismissed from her post because she had made a protected disclosure. She alleged that she was being asked to record inaccurate attendance records by the head of school and made this known to another member of staff. She felt that she was treated badly because she effectively blew the whistle. She presented her claim form to the Employment Tribunal but failed to mention that her dismissal was for Protected Disclosure. She simply stated on the claim form that she was unfairly dismissed but mentioned that she had 'made her objections known' as she was being asked to 'massage the figures'.
Some months after the form was presented to the Tribunal, Mrs Golding's representatives decided to make an application to amend the original claim form to add a claim for protected disclosure. The Tribunal rejected the application to amend and called it a 'substantive amendment'. Mrs Golding's representatives argued that it was simply adding more details to what Mrs Golding had indicated in her original claim form.
On appeal,, the Employment Appeal Tribunal took a different view. It was submitted on behalf of Mrs Golding that the original claim gave enough detail to show that Mrs Golding was relying on protected disclosure as the reason for her dismissal. Although there was no specific details she had mentioned that she had been treated badly because 'she had made her objections known' and 'raised her concerns'. It was argued that Mrs Golding did not need to raise specific terms or reliance on relevant Acts or Statutes. The claim form taken as a whole painted a reasonably clear picture of what Mrs Golding was complaining of and that now she was simply adding details to an exisiting allegation.
Representatives for the School relied upon Selkent principles and argued that Mrs Golding was raising a completely new claim and was presenting new factual allegations.
The Employment Appeal Tribubal allowed Mrs Golding's appeal. It held that the initial claim form did form the essential basis of a claim that Mrs Golding suffered dismissal by reason of a protected disclosure. She had stated at the outset that she had been bullied and then dismissed for 'massaging the figures'. That was enough and the makings of the case were there even though more flesh could have been placed on the bones.
Although the Employment Appeal Tribunal's judgment is welcomed and gave Mrs Golding the opportunity to plead her claim in full, the case showed the importance of completing initial claim forms properly. Mrs Golding won the appeal only because she had managed to put some helpful indications in her original claim form that she was dismissed because of whistleblowing. She had never expressly stated it. The importance of carefully pleading one's case and making sure that the relevant details are put clearly in the claim form cannot be emphasised strongly enough.
Susheel Bellara appeared for Mrs Golding before the Employment Appeal Tribunal.
He specialises in employment law and has represented employers and employees before the Tribunals.
Disclaimer: All information on this site is provided for informational purposes only! By no means is any
information presented herein intended to substitute for the advice provided to you by any health care or other professional
or organization.
