Mr Bayram (Lay Representative) For the v Mr S Joshi (Solicitor) — 2020

At the 2 July 2020 preliminary hearing, the tribunal considered the respondent's applications to strike out the claims and, alternatively, to make a deposit order. It refused strike out in relation to the claims identified at paragraph 11, saying it could not conclude on the documents and submissions that those claims had no reasonable prospects of success. The judge also said the claims were being actively pursued.

The paragraph 11 claims were identified as whistleblowing dismissal under s.103A ERA 1996, health and safety dismissal under s.100(1)(c) ERA 1996, and direct race discrimination by dismissal on 23 January 2019. The tribunal recorded the claimant's case that the dismissal was linked to her workplace accident, her solicitors' letter about that accident, and her complaints about health and safety, and that she said race was also a reason. The judge said he could not yet reach a view whether the dismissal was influenced by those matters or by race, and noted that the timing of events and the apparently rushed capability process left open the possibility of reasons other than performance.

For the five direct race discrimination allegations listed at paragraph 12, the tribunal said the claimant could not provide even basic detail despite requests for particulars. It considered those allegations had little prospects of success and made a deposit order of £250 in total, described as £50 for each claim. The tribunal told the claimant that if she decided not to pursue those allegations she did not need to pay the deposit, but if she did wish to continue she had to pay within 21 days and provide the requested particulars.