Ms E Schofield v DCK Concessions Limited — 2019

At the open preliminary hearing on 13 December 2019, Employment Judge Scott refused the respondent's application to strike out the claimant's claims under Rule 37. The judge accepted that the claimant had served her reply to the request for further information late and that the response had initially been incomplete, but after clarification at the hearing the reply was treated as complete. Applying the overriding objective and the authorities cited on strike out, the tribunal held that the case was still capable of a fair hearing and that strike out would be disproportionate.

The judgment records a detailed chronology of the claimant's late compliance with directions, including the service of medical evidence on 8 November 2019 and the late reply to the request for further information on 12 November 2019. The respondent argued that the proceedings had not been actively pursued and that a fair hearing was no longer possible; the tribunal rejected that submission and noted that the claimant should ensure strict compliance with future orders. The judge also observed that a costs application remained open to the respondent.

The tribunal also refused the respondent's estoppel application. Although the COT3 dated 20 April 2017 was described as a full and final settlement of claims as at that date, the judge held that it did not prevent the claimant relying on pre-COT3 events as background evidence for claims arising after the settlement. The tribunal said that the claimant could not seek relief for matters predating the COT3, but could rely on earlier events so far as necessary and proportionate to explain the later allegations.

The order at the top of the judgment records that the equal pay claim was dismissed upon withdrawal. No monetary award was made in this judgment, and the remaining claims were allowed to proceed to a later hearing.