Mr G Uren v Good Food Studio Ltd — 2023

The claim was presented on 29 September 2022. In directions issued on 25 January 2023, Employment Judge Tsamados required the claimant to particularise complaints described as automatic unfair dismissal, unlawful detriment arising from protected disclosure, and disability discrimination, including the alleged impairment, the disability allegations, the protected disclosures relied on, and the detriments said to follow from them. The claimant did not respond to those directions and did not return a case management agenda before the first preliminary hearing.

The claimant attempted to join the 14 July 2023 preliminary hearing but disconnected before the hearing proper began and did not subsequently engage with the Tribunal. Because of an administrative error, the further hearing directed for 25 August 2023 was not listed, and the case did not progress until a pre-hearing check in April 2024. The first day of the listed final hearing was converted into a public preliminary hearing to address strike-out and case management issues.

On 21 May 2024 neither party attended. The judge proceeded in the claimant's absence after email and telephone contact attempts and considered the strike-out application on the papers. Applying Rule 37(1)(d) and Rule 37(2) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, together with the authorities in Evans v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Birkett v James, the tribunal held that there had been contumelious delay and, in any event, inordinate and inexcusable delay creating likely serious prejudice because the respondent remained unable to understand and investigate the allegations. The claim was struck out as not actively pursued, and no merits finding or remedy was made.