The EAT (Slade J) has handed down its decision in Baker v Metropolitan Police, concerning issues of procedure and approach in a discrimination / victimisation claim. The EAT held as follows:-
- The Tribunal did not err in its finding that the ET1 did not include a claim for disability discrimination. Although a technical approach to the question of whether a particular claim is raised in an ET1 is inappropriate, in this case whilst the Claimant had ticked the box marked "Disability" he did not thereafter make a recognisable complaint of disability discrimination.
- The Tribunal did err in refusing to hear the Claimant's application to amend the ET1, which was made in the course of closing submissions. The lateness of the application was just one factor to be considered and the Tribunal should have considered the balance of injustice to the parties.
- In respect of the approach to the victimisation claim, the Tribunal did not err in introducing characteristics relevant to the reason why the Respondent acted as it did at the comparative stage of the test. In any event the decision to dismiss the victimisation claim was plainly and unarguably right.