Mr Wayne Bell v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis — 2022

The claimant brought two claims against the respondent. The first alleged race discrimination. The second raised further complaints of race discrimination, detrimental treatment because he had made protected disclosures, and disability discrimination. The tribunal considered that, between the two claims, the claimant appeared to allege race discrimination, harassment related to race, victimisation, whistleblowing detriment and disability discrimination.

The respondent applied for strike out, relying on the claimant's failure to provide further and better particulars ordered at earlier preliminary hearings and on his non-attendance at the open preliminary hearing. The tribunal found that the claimant had been sent notice of the hearing and of the strike out application, had not shown that he had notified the tribunal of a new email address, and had been given sufficient opportunity to respond to the application.

The tribunal found that the claimant had been given two opportunities to set out the specific heads of complaint and the basis on which each was put, but the information he provided did not address the matters required by the case management orders. It accepted the respondent's application under rule 37(1)(b) and, to a lesser extent, rule 37(1)(d), finding that the claims could not be progressed because sufficient particulars had not been provided and the claimant had not attended the hearing. The claims were struck out.