Hi I wonder if you can help, I think this forum is amazing and I would appreciate some advice please. Can a Respondent use the Henderson and Henderson argument of abuse of process (ie: you can't get a second bite of the cherry) if the claim was referred to before but only at a preliminary hearing and not in the ET1 but as a head of loss on the Schedule of Loss and was dismissed during the case management orders? (That claim went to a full hearing and I won the right to receive occupational sick pay instead of SSP.) At that first preliminary hearing the Judge told me to "put a claim in" when he heard that holiday pay was previously underpaid and this was a continuing occurence. However, the Respondent is relying on the word "dismissed" in their argument for getting the claim thrown out, even though the claim had not been advanced as it was during a preliminary hearing. (Something in my daze prevented me from telling that to the different Judge at the new preliminary hearing for holiday pay, as their barrister certainly didn't!) Also, the old schedule of loss only referred to statutory holiday pay, but I found that I was entitled to contractual holiday pay out of time to amend the ET1 (this entitlement was in my contract which I had not seen since 2002 but they disclosed it 2 days before the hearing) so I put in my new calculations in the new claim. So it is a new claim with different particulars and a different starting date and I only knew about the contractual benefits when I saw my whole contract 2 days before the first hearing during a late disclosure from the Respondent - which outlined the benefit that they had withheld since 2002. (I only got the occupational sick pay during the first hearing since it was on the ET1 as "unpaid sick pay" but at the time of filing I had only ever received SSP for some of the time I was off sick). Also, to explain why I had not seen my contract since 2002, I didn't have the need to as I liked my job, but they cut my hours recently - calling me a casual worker, which I disputed since I had regular hours for years. I hope this makes sense! Any advice (or reassurance would be great as I am representing myself). Many thanks in advance! PS: Extra information: At the first preliminary hearing the respondent pleaded” ”The Claimant's ET1 does not disclose any claim for holiday pay, whether by way of a wages claim or under the Working Times Regulations 1998. According such a claim is not before the Tribunal for determination". In response the Judge made the following Case Management order: "The claim for holiday pay appears only in the Schedule of Loss and is also unquantified. It was not included or referred to in her ET1 and is accordingly dismissed".