Health Transportation Group Ltd and Others

Case Summary

The claimants applied for reconsideration of a judgment dismissing their applications to amend their claims to add indirect age discrimination and TUPE Regulations claims. The tribunal found no reasonable prospect of the original judgment being varied or revoked, as the amendment decision was properly reasoned and adequately explained the factors considered under Selkent principles.

The tribunal concluded there was no reasonable prospect of the judgment being varied or revoked because the original decision to dismiss the amendment applications was adequately reasoned, identifying and addressing the material factors required under amendment law (nature of amendment, timing, manner, and balance of prejudice). No denial of natural justice occurred; the claimants' arguments were considered and the tribunal's reasoning sufficiently explained the decision.

• •Whether amendment applications to add claims of indirect age discrimination should be permitted
• •Whether amendment applications to add TUPE Regulations 13, 14 and 15 claims should be permitted
• •Adequacy of tribunal reasons for refusing amendment applications
• •Compliance with natural justice in amendment procedure

– 1401928/2024 1402199/2024 – 1402203/2024 1402267/2024 – 1402271/2024 1402779/2024 – 1402783/2024 1400931/2025 1 of 13 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimants:Mr G Sutton Mr T Croucher Mr J Scott Mr K Jones Mr A House Respondents:(1) Health Transportation Group Limited (2) NHS Dorset (3) EMED Group Limited Heard at:Bristol (decision on papers in Chambers) JUDGMENT ON APPLICATION FOR RECONSIDERATION 1. The claimants’ application dated 4 February 2026 for reconsideration of the judgment sent to the parties on 22 January 2026 is refused. REASONS 2. On 4 February 2026 the claimants applied for reconsideration of the Judgment dated 5 January 2026 which was sent to the parties on 22 January 2026 (“the Judgment”). The grounds of the application are contained in a document of the same date. 3. The relevant aspects of the Judgment which attract the claimants’ application are the decision to dismiss the claimants’ applications to amend the claim to add claims of indirect age discrimination and regulations 13, 14 and 15 of the TUPE Regulations 2006. – 1401928/2024 1402199/2024 – 1402203/2024 1402267/2024 – 1402271/2024 1402779/2024 – 1402783/2024 1400931/2025 2 of 13 4. Schedule 1 of The Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2024 contains the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024 (“the Rules”). Under Rule 68 an application for reconsideration under Rule 70 must be made within 14 days of the date on which the decision (or, if later, the written reasons) were sent to the parties. The application was therefore received within the relevant time. 5. I have undertaken preliminary consideration of the claimants’ application. References in square brackets (e.g. [25]) are references to paragraph numbers from the reasons promulgated with the judgment. The Law 6. Rules 68 to 71 of The Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 (the “Rules”) provide: “Reconsideration of judgments Pr…