Ms Linda Burke (Representative) For the v Respondent — 2020

The claimant was employed as an Assistant Site Manager and his employment ended on 24 July 2018 after he signed a resignation letter dated 19/20 July 2018. He said he had been injured in a fall at the swimming pool on 9 July 2018, was off sick, and was pressurised to resign after the respondent arranged an investigation while he was absent. The hearing on 23 July 2020 was an open preliminary hearing on the respondent's strike out and deposit order application.

Applying Rules 37 and 39 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 and the caution in Anyanwu, the Employment Judge refused to strike out or deposit-order the unfair dismissal claim. The judge treated the circumstances around the resignation, the investigation during sickness absence, and the trade union representative's involvement as fact-sensitive matters that required a fuller hearing, so the claim was not found to have no or little reasonable prospect of success at that stage.

The age and disability discrimination claims were struck out. On disability, the judge said the prospects of proving disability on the evidence were remote, that there was no reasonable prospect of showing the respondent knew or could reasonably have been expected to know of any disability at the relevant times, and that there was no evidential basis for linking any unfavourable treatment to something arising in consequence of disability for the purposes of s.15 Equality Act 2010. On age, the judge found no pleaded comparator and no reasonable prospect of establishing less favourable treatment because of age.

The race and religion or belief discrimination claims, together with the arrears of pay and other payments claim, were dismissed upon withdrawal; the notice pay claim had already been dismissed upon withdrawal. The judge also made case management orders about the separate holiday pay issue, requiring the respondent to provide particulars of any payment for accrued but untaken holiday and the claimant to say whether he still pursued that claim. No substantive monetary award was made in this judgment.