Hla Kalaya Respondents (in all claims): (1) Ekk Vision Ltd t/a Boots Opticians (2) Boots Opticians Professional Services Ltd v Mr Graham, solicitor, for Boots Opticians Professional Services — 2022

At the open preliminary hearing on 9 May 2022, Employment Judge Rahman dealt with applications to strike out the remaining claims. The unfair dismissal complaint against Boots Opticians Professional Services Ltd was struck out because the claimant accepted that respondent was not her employer. The tribunal also recorded that the discrimination complaints against that respondent related to incidents between 10 August 2019 and 12 September 2019, with ACAS early conciliation started on 6 January 2020 and the ET1 presented on 3 March 2020, after the three-month limit had expired.

Applying s.123 Equality Act 2010, the tribunal held it was not just and equitable to extend time. It accepted that the claimant was a litigant in person and that English was not her first language, but found the medical evidence only covered a short period in October 2019 and did not explain the delay before or after that period. The disability, race, sex and religion or belief claims against the second respondent were therefore struck out.

Against Ekk Vision Ltd, the tribunal found repeated non-compliance with disclosure and impact-statement orders made after requests in October 2020 and June 2021 and orders in July 2021 and February 2022. It held that the claimant had not provided the ordered material, that the one-paragraph summary was not the required impact statement, and that the default had significantly prejudiced the first respondent because it did not know the case it had to meet. Applying rule 37(1)(c), HM Prison Service v Dolby, Hassan v Tesco Stores and the overriding objective, the tribunal struck out the remaining claims, including constructive unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal/notice pay, the disability complaints (direct discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, harassment, victimisation and failure to make reasonable adjustments), race, religion or belief, sexual orientation and age discrimination, protected disclosures detriment, the right-to-be-accompanied complaint, unlawful deduction of wages and holiday pay. No award was made.