Ms O A Ajiga v Northampton General Hospital NHS Trust RECORD OF A PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2025

At a public preliminary hearing on 27 March 2025, Employment Judge Tynan sitting alone refused the claimant's renewed recusal application. The judge applied Porter v Magill and said that a fair-minded and informed observer would not conclude there was a real possibility of bias. He also held that the fact the claimant had appealed an earlier decision refusing a CVP or hybrid final hearing did not justify recusal, and that the allegations of bias were unsupported by facts or evidence.

The judge recorded that the claimant had made repeated assertions that the in-person hearing in Cambridge, and the judge's enquiries about her mental health and wellbeing, were discriminatory or part of a wider conspiracy. He rejected those allegations, saying that the suggestion that he was part of a conspiracy or that he did not regard the claimant as equal to Caucasians was without merit. He also noted that the claimant's documents and correspondence contained repeated references to race.

The respondent then applied to strike out the proceedings under Rule 38(1)(a) and (b). Relying on authorities including Venice, ET Marler, Attorney General v Barker, Bolch v Chipman and Blockbuster Entertainment Ltd v James, the judge found that the claimant's conduct at the hearing and in correspondence was scandalous and unreasonable, that a fair trial was no longer possible, and that no less draconian alternative would be effective. He rejected options such as a deposit order, remote evidence for witnesses, or limits on cross-examination, and struck out the claim for having no reasonable prospect of success and because of the manner in which the proceedings had been conducted.