D Hallstrom (legal officer) For the v SJ Wood (solicitor) — 2023

Rebecca Chan and Jennifer Chan were employed by Rapid Personnel Limited as factory workers. At a preliminary hearing on 27 and 28 November 2023, the tribunal dealt only with the first respondent's strike-out application; the final merits hearing was postponed. The pleadings were described as sex discrimination and sexual orientation discrimination, with heads including harassment, victimisation and direct discrimination.

The tribunal struck out the harassment claim against the second respondent, William Abbey. Both parties accepted that he was not the person alleged to have harassed the claimants, so that claim had no reasonable prospect of success. The tribunal therefore held that the claim against him should not proceed.

The tribunal refused to strike out the claims against Rapid Personnel Limited. It did not accept the argument that the mistaken identification of the alleged harasser meant the direct discrimination and victimisation complaints about the grievance process, and the actions taken or not taken after the allegations were raised, should fail. It also rejected the submission that early conciliation had not been complied with in relation to the first respondent.

On the harassment claim against the first respondent, the tribunal applied s109 Equality Act 2010 and the guidance in Cox v Adecco Group UK & Ireland and ors. It held that whether the alleged harasser was an employee was a disputed factual საკითხ for the final hearing, and that it could not conclude on the limited evidence that the harassment claim had no reasonable prospects of success. The tribunal therefore refused strike out and also refused a deposit order.