Mr R Sthankiya v The Equality and Human Rights Commission — 2023

The claim was served on the respondent at its registered address on 23 May 2023, with a response deadline of 20 June 2023. No response was filed by that date. The respondent's solicitor later contacted the Tribunal on 26 June 2023 to say the ET1 may not have been received and asked for it to be sent again so that a late response and extension application could be prepared, but no application to extend time and no protective response were filed.

On the claimant's request for default judgment, Employment Judge Fredericks-Bowyer decided under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 that liability could properly be determined on the papers. The judgment states that the claimant's claims under this claim number succeed. The judgment does not identify a separate substantive findings analysis because the respondent was in default.

The Tribunal did not determine remedy in this judgment. It recorded that there was not enough information on the papers to assess remedy and that a separate Default Judgment Remedy Hearing would be listed. The respondent was to be permitted to participate in that later hearing only to the extent allowed by the Employment Judge at that hearing.