Ms S Cockburn v Airbus Operations Ltd — 2024

The tribunal recorded that the first claim included harassment, direct discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, and failure to make reasonable adjustments, and that the second claim included unfair dismissal, discrimination and whistleblowing allegations. The claimant was accepted to have been disabled within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010 from April 2016 by reason of Acute Polymorphic Psychotic Disorder.

The preliminary hearing concerned the respondent's strike-out application, the claimant's application to strike out the response or obtain default judgment, and case management if the claims continued. The tribunal accepted evidence that the claimant had sent emails, voicemails and other communications making allegations and threats directed at the respondent's employees and representatives, and did not accept her assertion that she was not responsible for them.

The tribunal concluded that the claimant's conduct was scandalous and unreasonable within rule 37(1)(b), and that the seriousness of the conduct justified strike out. It also accepted that a lesser sanction such as an unless order would not give a reasonable expectation that the behaviour would not be repeated, so the claimant's claims were struck out.