Aziz Ur Rahman Mohammed Miah v Health-on-Line Company UK Limited (AXA PPP) — 2019

Mr Miah issued his employment tribunal claim on 10 September 2014. He had applied for fee remission in relation to the initial fee of £250, but that application was refused on 18 August 2014 and the fee was not paid. The claim was nonetheless allowed to proceed, apparently by tribunal error. A fee letter was later sent on 22 December 2014 requiring payment of £950, or a fee remission application, by 16 March 2015.

The Tribunal recorded that Mr Miah did not comply with other directions. He filed a medical report on 2 February 2015, but did not respond to the Tribunal's letter of 20 February 2015 warning that the claim might be struck out because it was no longer possible to have a fair hearing by reason of his breach of directions. On 9 March 2015 the Employment Judge struck out the claim for non-compliance with directions. Mr Miah did not appeal that decision.

In 2018 the Tribunal treated correspondence from Mr Miah as a new claim form, but the hearing in September 2019 concerned the Respondent's objection that the matter was barred by res judicata because the same claim had already been struck out. Mr Miah argued that the real reason for non-compliance had been inability to pay fees, so the strike-out should be treated as if it had been for non-payment of fees. The Tribunal rejected that submission, finding there was no contemporaneous evidence that fee inability was the reason for the non-compliance and that the previous judicial decision could not be reopened by re-examining why he had not complied. The claim was therefore struck out, with the Tribunal holding that it had no jurisdiction to hear it.