Claimant v Airpoint Ltd and Others — 2018

At this preliminary hearing on 31 January 2018, the tribunal dealt with cross-applications for strike out and, alternatively, deposit orders. The respondent sought to remove parts of the claimant's sex discrimination and dismissal case from the February 2018 merits hearing, while the claimant made a similar application against the respondent's response. The judge refused both sides' applications and allowed the claim and defence to proceed in full. No substantive remedy was awarded at this stage.

On the sex discrimination issues, the respondent argued that some allegations were weak or unclear, including the complaint about the Christmas party date, the comparator said to be relied on, the indirect discrimination point based on a refusal to move the party date, and the harassment and victimisation allegations. The claimant said the event had been fixed on a date when female staff could not attend, identified the PCP as fixing and refusing to alter the date, and maintained that the factual disputes had to be heard. The tribunal held it would be premature and disproportionate to exclude any of the discrimination allegations without evidence.

On dismissal, the claimant said the case was a last straw constructive dismissal claim and that the grievance outcome was the event that led to her resignation. The tribunal found that the dismissal claim was permeated by factual disputes that could not be resolved without evidence from both parties. It also refused a deposit order, saying it could not yet be said that the claims had little reasonable prospect of success, and it refused to strike out the respondent's defence because the claimant's complaints were met by denials that had to be tested at the merits hearing.