Pharmacy technician allowed to add unfair dismissal claim after disability discrimination case
A tribunal allowed a Boots pharmacy technician with 12 years' service to amend her claim to include unfair dismissal, finding the new claim was a relabelling of existing facts.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed from 2009 until dismissal on 13 August 2021 for gross misconduct.
- The claimant has disabilities (epilepsy and left side paralysis) admitted by the respondent.
- The claimant presented a disability discrimination claim on 11 November 2021, but did not include unfair dismissal.
- The claimant applied to amend her claim to add unfair dismissal on 22 February 2023.
- The tribunal found the amendment was a relabelling of facts already in the ET1 and addendum.
- The amendment was allowed, with the final hearing extended to include 8 and 9 August 2024.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment as Accuracy Checking Pharmacy Technician (ACPT) at Boots.
-
Transfer to Lowestoft store
Claimant transferred to Lowestoft store as a reasonable adjustment for her disabilities.
-
Grandfather died
Claimant's grandfather died; grandmother required residential care.
-
Investigation meeting
Claimant attended investigation meeting regarding misconduct allegations and was suspended.
-
Grievance raised
Claimant raised a grievance linked to disciplinary proceedings.
-
Solicitor's letter
Leathes Prior wrote to respondent raising discrimination and potential unfair dismissal claim.
-
Dismissal
Claimant dismissed without notice for gross misconduct.
-
Acas early conciliation
Ms. Collins notified Acas; unfair dismissal discussed.
-
Claim presented
ET1 presented for disability discrimination only.
-
Case management hearing
EJ Lewis KC listed preliminary hearing and ordered amendment application by 27 February 2023.
-
Amendment application
Claimant applied to add unfair dismissal claim.
-
Preliminary hearing
Employment Judge H. Mason heard the amendment application.
-
Judgment
Amendment allowed; unfair dismissal claim added.
The legal issue
Whether the claimant, who had already brought a disability discrimination claim, could amend her claim to add unfair dismissal after the primary time limit had expired, given that the new claim was based on the same underlying facts.
The outcome
The tribunal allowed the amendment, adding the unfair dismissal claim to the existing disability discrimination case.
The key reason was that the unfair dismissal claim was a 'relabelling' of facts already set out in the original ET1 and addendum. The tribunal found no prejudice to the respondent that could not be compensated by costs, and noted the claimant had raised unfair dismissal during Acas early conciliation.
No compensation has been awarded yet as the case proceeds to a final hearing.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you raise a potential claim during Acas early conciliation, it may help support a later amendment to add that claim.
- A claim that is a 'relabelling' of facts already pleaded is more likely to be allowed as an amendment, even after the time limit.
- Tribunals consider the balance of hardship and whether the respondent can be compensated by costs when deciding amendment applications.
- Lay representatives should ensure all potential claims are included in the original claim form to avoid the need for amendments.
This case shows how employment tribunals handle applications to add new claims after the original deadline has passed. The claimant, an accuracy checking pharmacy technician with 12 years' service at Boots, had originally brought a disability discrimination claim following her dismissal for gross misconduct. Nearly 18 months later, she applied to add an unfair dismissal claim.
The tribunal focused on whether the new claim was a 'relabelling' of facts already in the original claim. The judge found that the dismissal was central to the disability discrimination case, and the unfair dismissal claim simply added a different legal label to the same events. This made the amendment easier to allow.
What the respondent could have done differently was to consent to the amendment earlier, avoiding the need for a preliminary hearing. The tribunal noted that the respondent had been on notice of a potential unfair dismissal claim since the Acas early conciliation stage, and that any prejudice could be addressed by costs.
For employees considering bringing a claim, this case highlights the importance of including all potential claims in the original ET1. If you miss one, an amendment may still be possible if the facts are already there, but it adds delay and uncertainty. The case also shows that tribunals will consider the practical realities of lay representation and the need for flexibility in the interests of justice.
Similar cases
Epilepsy discrimination claims dismissed as out of time: a lesson in tribunal deadlines
A fraud consultant with epilepsy lost his disability discrimination and constructive dismissal claims against Lloyds Bank because he filed them too late. The tribunal also found the claims lacked merit.
Supply teacher wins right to add victimisation claim against school
A tribunal allowed a supply teacher to amend her disability discrimination claim to include victimisation, and later granted an anonymity order after initially refusing it.
Sales assistant with chronic kidney disease loses disability discrimination claim over furlough placement
A former nurse turned sales assistant who was placed on furlough during the pandemic due to shielding advice has lost her disability and age discrimination claims against Irvings Butchers Limited.
Dismissed after absence management meetings: tribunal rejects disability discrimination claims
An employee with a mental health disability lost all claims of unfair dismissal and discrimination after the tribunal found the health board's absence management process was reasonable.