Mr U Munir v DFSI M25 Limited — 2025

The claim was issued on 12 January 2022. At the private preliminary hearing on 30 June 2023, the tribunal made case management orders requiring, among other things, an amended claim with dates of the alleged discriminatory acts, any authorities if caste was to be pursued, a schedule of loss, disclosure, witness statements, and further information about the alleged last working day for the notice pay claim. The respondent repeatedly asked for the missing material, but the claimant did not provide the required information and instead sent health documents.

At the hearing on 2 April 2025, the tribunal found that the claimant had responded to emails but had not supplied the specific information requested by the tribunal or the respondent. It accepted that he believed he had already provided the material, but found that he had not done so and that the respondent had taken steps to clarify what was required. The tribunal also recorded that the claimant had been warned of the risk of strike out.

The tribunal was not satisfied that the proceedings had been conducted in a scandalous or vexatious way, and it was not satisfied that the claim had not been actively pursued because the claimant had been engaging by email. It was, however, satisfied that the claimant had failed to comply with tribunal orders on repeated occasions, that the case remained unprepared more than three years after issue, and that the respondent had suffered evidential prejudice, delay and cost. The tribunal concluded that a fair hearing was not possible in all the circumstances and that strike out was a proportionate response, so the claim was struck out under rule 38(1)(c).