In person For the v Respondent — 2023

The claimant presented claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination by failure to make reasonable adjustments. This hearing was a preliminary hearing on the respondent's application to strike out, or alternatively seek a deposit order in relation to, the reasonable adjustments claim. The tribunal recorded that the disability relied upon was mixed anxiety with depression and that disability was not conceded by the respondent.

The tribunal accepted that the claimant, a litigant in person, had not complied perfectly with earlier directions but had not failed to comply altogether. It held that the claimant had sufficiently identified the PCPs and the substantial disadvantage relied on, noting that the respondent conceded points iv, x, xii, xiv and xx could amount to PCPs and that the remaining points could be fine-tuned in case management.

Applying rule 37 and rule 39, and noting the caution required in strike-out applications in discrimination cases, the tribunal concluded that it could not say the reasonable adjustments claim had no reasonable prospects of success or little reasonable prospect of success. It therefore refused to strike out the claim and refused a deposit order, leaving the reasonable adjustments claim to be determined at a full merits hearing. The judgment also records that the respondent conceded the dismissal was unfair, but the unfair dismissal remedy remained outstanding and was not decided in this hearing.