Mr Christian Mallon v Aecom Limited — 2019

At the preliminary hearing on 9 May 2019, Employment Judge Burgher considered Mr Christian Mallon's disability discrimination complaint against Aecom Ltd, which concerned an alleged reasonable adjustments issue arising from the respondent's online application process. The tribunal listed strike out and deposit order issues under rules 37 and 39 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013. Aecom relied on the fact that the claimant had brought numerous earlier tribunal claims, many of them against recruitment agencies, and said the present claim was vexatious and had no reasonable prospect of success.

The tribunal did not strike out the claim on vexatiousness alone. It accepted that discrimination claims should only be struck out in the clearest cases and recorded the claimant's position that this case was different because it concerned an online application form rather than a CV submission or oral application. The tribunal treated that distinction as a matter that would ordinarily require evidence and, on that basis, it did not strike the claim out on the ground that it was vexatious.

The claim was struck out on the separate ground that it had no reasonable prospect of success. The tribunal held that the claimant was unlikely to establish that the online application form was a PCP that placed him at a substantial disadvantage. It noted that the respondent repeatedly asked what assistance he needed, but he did not identify specific problems with the form and instead insisted on an oral application. The tribunal found that he had previously completed online forms, and considered it unlikely that he could show he could not have sought help from his partner, a job centre or an advice centre. It also relied on the earlier Defra decision, which had rejected a similar argument about obtaining assistance to complete an application.

The tribunal therefore found this to be one of the rare cases where strike out of a discrimination claim was appropriate. The claim was struck out and therefore dismissed, and no deposit order or remedy was made.