Case 4104414/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Jill Meikle v Herself Gas Call Services Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 4104414/2022
- Decision date
- 1 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ian McPherson
- Venue
- chambers at Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Jill Meikle
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs Meikle's case against Gas Call Services Ltd was managed at preliminary hearings in October and December 2022. The tribunal ordered her to provide further and better particulars of her disability discrimination claim, a disability impact statement and a detailed schedule of loss. On 8 December 2022 it made an unless order requiring compliance by 18 January 2023, with an express warning that the whole claim would be dismissed without further order if she did not comply.
The respondents applied for a preparation time order of £151.20 for the work associated with the 7 December 2022 hearing. The claimant, through her son and later by email, opposed the application and said she had complied to the best of her ability. The tribunal accepted that her conduct was unreasonable for costs purposes, but refused to make a preparation time order. It was not satisfied on the evidence that the respondents had actually incurred an out-of-pocket loss in the way suggested, and it also took account of the claimant's limited means and lack of information about ability to pay.
On the disposal of the claim, the tribunal found there had been no material compliance with the unless order. The claimant had not provided the required particulars, disability impact statement or schedule of loss, and the papers still did not set out the legal basis of the claim with sufficient clarity. The whole claim was therefore dismissed under Rule 38(1). The tribunal noted that any application for relief from sanctions within 14 days of the judgment and Rule 38 notice would be reserved for further consideration.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed under Rule 38(1) after the claimant failed to comply materially with the unless order requiring further and better particulars of the disability discrimination claim, a disability impact statement and a detailed schedule of loss. The tribunal did not determine the merits. The respondents said the material before the tribunal referred to victimisation, reasonable adjustments, s.15 and s.26 EqA 2010, but no permitted amendment or adequate particularisation had been provided. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- Rule 38 automatic dismissal on non-compliance
- Rule 76 unreasonable conduct
- Haydar three-stage costs process
- Rule 84 ability to pay
- Chandhok v Tirkey essential case in ET1
- Cox v Adecco identification of claims
- Reilly/Hasan/Balls/Ezsias strike-out caution
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.