Glasgow Life

Case Summary

The claimant sought to amend his claim to add a new complaint of automatic unfair dismissal under section 103A ERA based on alleged protected disclosures. The tribunal refused the amendment application, finding that the new complaint was made significantly out of time (17 March 2026, over two years after dismissal on 4 July 2024), and that it was not reasonably practicable for it to have been omitted from the original ET1 submitted on 13 January 2025, particularly given the claimant had professional legal representation at that time.

The tribunal refused the amendment because the complaint of automatic unfair dismissal under section 103A ERA based on protected disclosures was submitted significantly out of time (17 March 2026, nearly two years after dismissal and over two months after the extended limitation period closed on 13 January 2025). The tribunal found it was not reasonably practicable for this distinct complaint to have been omitted from the original ET1, since the claimant had professional legal representation at that time and had already brought a standard unfair dismissal complaint within the time limit. The section 103A claim constitutes a separate and distinct complaint from the section 98 unfair dismissal claim originally pleaded.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •Whether claimant's application to amend ET1 to add claim of automatic unfair dismissal under section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996 based on protected disclosure (whistleblowing) should be allowed
• •Whether amendment was made out of time and whether it was reasonably practicable for the complaint to have been submitted within the statutory time limit
• •Distinction between unfair dismissal under section 98 ERA and automatic unfair dismissal under section 103A ERA

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) 5 Held via video on 10 April 2026 Employment Judge McManus 10 Mr S Findlay Claimant In Person Glasgow Life Respondent 15 Represented by: Ms G O’Neill (Solicitor) 20 JUDGMENT OF THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL The decision of the Tribunal is that: The claimant’s amendment application to include a claim of automatic unfair dismissal under the Employment Rights Act 1996 section 103A, reliant on having made a protected disclosure is refused. 25 REASONS Background 1. This Preliminary Hearing (‘PH’) was for the purpose of considering whether 30 or not the claimants’ application to amend the ET1 should be allowed. The respondent had prepared a Bundle for this PH and the claimant had sent emails to the Tribunal and the respondent’s representatives on 9 and 10 April with various attachments which he sought to rely on at this PH. The 8000089/25 Page 2 respondent’s representative helpfully agreed to organise those attachments into a Bundle for the claimant and provided this. 2. The claimant’s ET1 claim form was submitted on behalf of the claimant by Unionline Scotland on 13 January 2025. Unionline were instructed by the claimant’s then trade union (GMB). The ET1 and separate ‘paper apart’ 5 brought complaints of unfair dismissal, discrimination arising from disability, and failure to make reasonable adjustments. Case Management Preliminary Hearings (‘CMPHs’) took place on 11 March and 4 November 2025. The claimant was represented at the outset and at each of those CMPHs by a solicitor from Unionline Scotland. At those CMPHs there was discussion on 10 the issues which were for determination by the Tribunal. Case Management Orders were made to…