Case 3320853/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Not present For the v Norse Commercial Services Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3320853/2021
- Decision date
- 15 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Postle Appearances
- Venue
- Norwich
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Not present For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Murrell's disability discrimination claim was before Employment Judge Postle on the respondent's application to strike out. The respondent said the first claim, presented on 29 September 2021, did not identify with sufficient clarity the disability or disabilities relied on, and that the claimant had not provided the medical information and GP records ordered by Employment Judges M Warren, Postle, and Craft. The tribunal recorded earlier case management orders made on 3 March 2022 and 4 October 2022 requiring further particulars and disclosure.
Both sides made written submissions on Rule 37 strike out and the overriding objective. The respondent argued that the claimant's and his solicitors' conduct had been unreasonable because of repeated non-compliance with the orders. The claimant said he had tried to obtain the records, that delays were connected with moving house, GP delays, and staffing problems, and that the information eventually provided was sufficient to show that his conditions cumulatively met the definition of disability.
In reasons dated 16 August 2023 and sent on 22 August 2023, the tribunal declined to strike out the claim. It accepted that there had been repeated breaches of orders and that some of the correspondence from the claimant's solicitors was unhelpful, but it also took account of the claimant's apparent vulnerability and the difficulties in obtaining medical records during and after the pandemic. The tribunal was not persuaded that the non-compliance was intentional, held that strike out would be disproportionate and not in the interests of justice, and warned that any further failure to comply with orders could lead to strike out and a costs order. Costs were left to be revisited after the full merits hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Respondent's strike-out application was refused; the substantive disability discrimination claim remained live for the full merits hearing. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 37(1)(a)
- Rule 37(1)(b)
- Rule 37(1)(c)
- Rule 2 overriding objective
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.