Claimant should have sought an amendment application to his first claim rather than issuing separate proceedings relating to a slightly separate element against the same respondent.

The claimant had brought a claim against the respondent for unfair dismissal which was determined in July 2022. The claimant then brought a second claim against the respondent in September 2022. This related to unsuccessful job applications he had made in May 2022.  The issue was whether the second claim could continue or whether it was an abuse of process considering that he had the live claim ongoing against the respondent.

The Tribunal, at first instance, found that the second claim was an abuse of process on the basis that the claimant could have and should have made an application to amend the ongoing claim rather than waiting for it to end and then restarting proceedings against the same respondent. The EAT agreed with the decision of the Tribunal. The EAT did state that the amendment application may have been refused and that then issuing the proceedings afresh could have been brought separately and considered. However, the fact no application to amend was made meant that it was an abuse of process.

A fairly procedural case but can be useful especially when there are instances in which multiple claims may arise from a claimant against an employer.  The EAT is making it clear here that where that does arise, and there are ongoing related proceedings against the respondent, then the expectation is that an application to amend is brought rather than issuing separate proceedings.  This makes sense from the point of efficiency but also ensuring the proper administration of justice in the context of a large number of claims before the Tribunal.

You can read the case in full here.