Mrs Sicong Wang v Coventry University — 2024

Mrs Wang’s claim against Coventry University came before Employment Judge Boyle at a preliminary hearing on 14 August 2024 after a lengthy history of case management difficulties. The judge noted that earlier judges had repeatedly tried to bring the matter back on track, and that the respondent had produced a bundle, list of issues and witness statements while the claimant continued to rely on superseded orders and repeated strike-out applications. The tribunal refused the claimant’s application to strike out the respondent’s response, finding no rule 37 basis for doing so and no criticism of the respondent’s conduct in the earlier orders.

The respondent’s application to strike out the claimant’s claim succeeded. The tribunal recorded that the claimant did not attend the final hearing listed for 22 and 23 May 2024, gave no explanation when invited to do so, and later repeated only that she relied on three reasons previously given. The judge found that the claimant had made no attempt to contact the tribunal or respondent to say she would not attend, that a two-day hearing had been vacated, and that the claimant’s conduct went beyond mere non-attendance because it formed part of a wider pattern of refusing to engage with the tribunal process.

Applying rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013, the judge found the claimant’s conduct to be unreasonable and vexatious, and also found that there had been deliberate and persistent attempts to frustrate the proceedings. The judgment refers to the claimant refusing to open Mimecast links, repeating complaints about historic case management orders that had been superseded, and making repeated strike-out requests which the tribunal regarded as baseless. The judge concluded that a fair hearing was no longer possible and that strike out was proportionate and in the interests of justice. No monetary remedy was awarded because the claim was struck out.