Claimant v Euro Car Parks — 2019

The claimant presented claims of unfair dismissal, age discrimination, unpaid notice pay and arrears of pay in April 2017. After he did not attend the first case management discussion and failed to provide further particulars of age discrimination or a schedule of loss, the tribunal issued warning letters and an unless order. At the preliminary hearing on 12 June 2018 the tribunal confirmed that the age discrimination claim stood dismissed, and the remaining claims continued on standard unfair dismissal directions.

By December 2018 the respondent said it had proposed fresh directions for disclosure, further particulars and witness statements, but the claimant had not complied or engaged. The respondent applied to strike out the claims under rule 37 on the basis that the proceedings had been conducted unreasonably and vexatiously, and later said the claimant had refused delivery of its witness statements. The claimant said he was representing himself, was not computer literate, had not received the directions he referred to, and complained that the respondent was harassing him unnecessarily.

The tribunal accepted that striking out is a draconian step, but concluded that the claimant, including as a litigant in person, had been given ample opportunity to present his case and to comply with tribunal orders and reasonably suggested deadlines. It found that he had failed to comply with his obligations and struck out the remaining claims for unreasonable conduct. The hearing listed for 5 June 2019 was vacated.