Mr L Morgan v Clearwater Fire Limited and 3 others — 2019

This was a preliminary hearing on strike out, a deposit order, and case management. The claimant said he had been constructively dismissed and pursued disability discrimination claims under sections 15, 19, 20 and 21, together with harassment and victimisation. The tribunal accepted that the claimant had some material support for his position that he was a disabled person, including an occupational health report and a consultant's report, but the respondents disputed disability and knowledge of it.

The tribunal struck out the section 19 indirect discrimination claim and the section 27 victimisation claim under Rule 37. It held that the indirect discrimination pleading did not give fair notice of the PCP relied on and that the claim had no reasonable prospects of success. The victimisation claim failed because the claimant identified his grievance as the protected act, but did not identify a separate detriment caused by that grievance; the tribunal said the later outcome decision did not amount to such a detriment.

The tribunal refused to strike out the remaining claims for dismissal, discrimination arising from disability, reasonable adjustments, and harassment, and also refused the respondents' application for a deposit order. It considered that there was sufficient material from the claim form, further particulars, and discussion at the hearing to give fair notice of those claims, and that the issues depended on disputed facts that required evidence. It also refused to strike out the claims against the individual respondents, because if the alleged conduct were proved there was a legal basis on which they could be separately liable. No monetary award was made in this judgment; instead, the tribunal ordered a limited Rule 31 disclosure exercise, a schedule of loss, and set out the issues for the final hearing.