Big City Leisure Ltd v McCarthy - Amendment to ET3 should be allowed where no relevant admission made
Permission to amend ET3 as no admission to relevant averment in Claimant's ET1
Mr McCarthy was employed as doorman at a bar purchased by the appellant (Big City Leisure). Big City Leisure dismissed Mr McCarthy on the basis that they were outsourcing the security for the bar. Mr McCarthy claimed unfair and wrongful dismissal and a claim under TUPE.