Long-serving civil servant allowed to add discrimination claims after dismissal
A tribunal has allowed a civil servant with 24 years' service to amend his claim to include failure to make reasonable adjustments at the appeal stage, and refused the employer's bid to strike out the case.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was dismissed on 1 February 2022 after 24 years of service as an Executive Officer.
- The claimant appealed against dismissal; the appeal was dismissed on 14 June 2022.
- The claimant alleged a continuing act of discrimination from June 2020 to July 2022.
- The claimant relied on multiple medical conditions to assert disability status.
- The tribunal granted permission to amend the claim to include failure to make reasonable adjustments at the appeal stage.
- The respondent's application to strike out or for a deposit order was refused.
Timeline
-
Protected act complaint
The claimant complained of race discrimination and harassment.
-
Decision to dismiss
The respondent decided to dismiss the claimant, allegedly due to long-term absence.
-
Dismissal
The claimant was dismissed with effect from 1 February 2022, receiving compensation in lieu of notice.
-
Appeal lodged
The claimant appealed against his dismissal.
-
ACAS early conciliation started
ACAS conciliation began, lasting until 6 April 2022.
-
Appeal hearing
The claimant attended an appeal hearing.
-
Claim form presented
The claimant presented his claim to the tribunal, ticking boxes for unfair dismissal, discrimination, and other claims.
-
Occupational Health report
An OH report recommended a phased return to work and other adjustments.
-
Further appeal meeting
The claimant attended a further appeal meeting and agreed with the OH report.
-
Appeal dismissed
The appeal officer dismissed the claimant's appeal.
-
Particulars of claim
The claimant sent written particulars of his claim, including new discrimination allegations.
-
Preliminary hearing
The claimant orally sought to add a claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments at the appeal stage.
-
Open Preliminary Hearing
The tribunal granted permission to amend, refused strike out, and set directions for final hearing.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant could add new discrimination allegations after filing his claim, and whether the employer's application to strike out the claim or require a deposit should be granted.
The outcome
The tribunal granted the claimant permission to amend his claim to include complaints of failure to make reasonable adjustments and discrimination arising from disability in relation to his dismissal appeal outcome. The respondent's application to strike out the claims or for a deposit order was refused.
Key reasons:
- The amendments were closely related to the existing claims and arose from the same facts.
- The claimant had a reasonable prospect of success on the new allegations.
- The respondent had not shown that the claim had no reasonable prospects or that a deposit was warranted.
No compensation was awarded at this stage as the case proceeds to a final hearing.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employees can often amend their claim to add new allegations if they arise from the same facts and are brought promptly.
- Employers should be cautious about seeking to strike out claims early, as tribunals will consider whether the claim has any reasonable prospect of success.
- Long-serving employees may be given more leeway to amend claims, especially if they are unrepresented.
A procedural battle with real consequences
This case shows how employment tribunals handle early-stage disputes over whether a claim can proceed. The claimant, a civil servant with 24 years' service, was dismissed in February 2022 after long-term sickness absence. He initially filed a claim without full details, later providing particulars and seeking to add allegations about the appeal process.
The employer argued that the claim lacked particulars and should be struck out or made subject to a deposit order. But the tribunal took a different view, allowing the amendments and refusing to throw out the case.
What the employer could have done differently
The respondent could have engaged with the claimant's medical evidence earlier and considered reasonable adjustments during the appeal. Instead, it focused on procedural objections, which the tribunal rejected. The decision suggests that employers should not rely on technical arguments to avoid addressing the substance of discrimination claims.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a reminder that tribunals will not lightly strike out claims, especially where amendments are closely linked to existing complaints. For employees, it shows that even if a claim form lacks detail, there may be an opportunity to add particulars later. For employers, it highlights the risk of opposing amendments that have a reasonable prospect of success.
Similar cases
Clinical Support Worker awarded statutory redundancy payment after 19 years' service
A tribunal awarded a statutory redundancy payment of £2,077.16 to a Clinical Support Worker with 19 years' service, finding that his refusal of an alternative role was not unreasonable.
Senior nurse's unfair dismissal claim struck out after being filed over four years late
A tribunal struck out a senior nurse's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims because she filed them more than four years after the deadline, despite knowing the time limits.
Firefighter with 18 years' service dismissed after guilty plea to firearms offences: dismissal fair
An employment tribunal has ruled that Royal Berkshire Fire Authority fairly dismissed a firefighter who pleaded guilty to 12 firearms offences, rejecting claims of race and disability discrimination.
Line Driver's discrimination claims dismissed as out of time after redundancy
An employment tribunal dismissed all discrimination claims brought by a part-time Line Driver with 4 years' service against Manheim Limited, finding they were brought too late and lacked merit. The unfair dismissal claim was withdrawn.