Under the new Procedural Rules, employment tribunal Claim Forms must contain certain matters, inlcuding "details of the Claim".
The EAT has held that it is sufficient to identify the statutory right that it is alleged has been breached (in that case, the Claim Form just said 'flexible working' but provided no other relevant details).
HHJ Prophet, overturning the tribunal's refusal to admit the claim, held that the test is "...whether it can be discerned from the claim as presented that the claimant is complaining of an alleged breach of an employment rights which falls within the jurisdiction of the Employment Tribunal" (para. 15).
He went on to make it clear that 'details of the claim' was not the same thing as 'particulars of the claim', and if a chairman thought that the claim was insufficiently particularised, the correct approach is to order further particulars rather than refuse to admit the claim.
Grimmer v KML Cityhopper