Mrs R Darcy v Serco Limited — 2023

The claimant brought a claim for outstanding payments, which she clarified as unpaid overtime during her suspension from around 22 May 2022 until her employment ended on 6 September 2022. The respondent applied to strike out the claim, arguing in substance that it lacked particularisation, was out of time, had no reasonable prospect of success, involved non-compliance with Tribunal orders, had not been actively pursued, and could no longer receive a fair hearing.

The Tribunal refused strike out under each part of Rule 37. It found that, taking account of the claimant's position as a litigant in person and the documents she had provided, including the document headed "money loss", the respondent had sufficient notice that the claim concerned overtime payments and how the claimant broadly calculated the sum said to be owed. The Tribunal also found that the claim appeared to be in time, based on the pleaded period of suspension and the dates of Acas Early Conciliation and presentation of the claim.

The Tribunal accepted that the claimant had not complied with orders in the form requested, but found that her non-compliance was not total and that she had attempted to provide information and supporting documents. It concluded that a fair trial remained possible, that strike out would not be proportionate, and that the claim was being actively pursued. The respondent's alternative application for a deposit order was also refused, and the case was to be listed for a one-day merits hearing.