In person For the first v Respondent — 2025

The tribunal considered whether claims should be struck out after the claimant provided further information following earlier case management orders. The judgment recorded that the claimant's latest information identified allegations including disability discrimination, public interest disclosure detriment, direct discrimination because of age, race, religion or belief and sex, and harassment related to sex.

The tribunal concluded that the direct age discrimination allegation about younger team members being shown new tasks, and the sex harassment allegation about being called 'Lovely Jacquie' in the context described by the claimant, could not be said to have no reasonable prospect of success and should continue. The tribunal also concluded that a deposit order was inappropriate for those surviving claims.

The tribunal struck out the remaining claims under rule 38(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. It found that the disability discrimination, public interest disclosure detriment, religion or belief, race, sex and other age discrimination claims, and the remaining harassment claims, had no reasonable prospect of success, including because several allegations were markedly imprecise or insufficiently specific.