Ms R Zakar v Search Consultancy Ltd and 1 other — 2019

The preliminary hearing concerned the second respondent's applications under rules 37 and 39 to strike out the claimant's discrimination claims against it or require a deposit as a condition of continuing them. The Tribunal refused both applications.

The Tribunal found it could not assess whether the claims against the second respondent had no reasonable prospects or little reasonable prospects without hearing evidence from the second respondent's line manager and considering the health and safety assessment carried out after the claimant announced she was pregnant. The Tribunal noted that the claimant was employed by the first respondent, not the second, but the parties accepted that discrimination legislation could apply beyond an employer-employee relationship and that the second respondent's conclusions about health and safety concerns led to her removal from the Customer Care Assistant role and refusal of alternative concierge work.

Because substantial findings of fact remained to be made, the Tribunal concluded it would be improper to strike out the claims or order a deposit at that stage. The claims against the second respondent were therefore to continue to the final hearing alongside the claims against the first respondent.