Mr S Oseruwoja v Respondent — 2019

Mr S Oseruwoja presented a race discrimination claim in June 2018. The respondent applied for strikeout under Rule 37(1)(b) of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, and the tribunal also considered the claimant's application to strike out the response. The claimant did not attend the final preliminary hearing on 29 January 2019, having previously stated that he would not attend public hearings.

The tribunal found that, from July 2018 onwards, the claimant sent a large volume of correspondence making unsubstantiated and prejudicial allegations about the respondent's solicitors, the police, the procurator fiscal, and the tribunal, including allegations of corruption, bribery, stalking, and bias. It held that this conduct amounted to scandalous conduct within the meaning of Rule 37(1)(b), relying on Bennett v London Borough of Southwark for the meaning of scandalous conduct, and also found the conduct to be unreasonable. The tribunal noted that the claimant had been warned about the consequences of continuing in this way, including in August 2018 and again in November 2018.

The tribunal further held that the conduct had impeded progress of the claim, consumed time and expense, and that a fair trial was no longer possible. It took into account the claimant's repeated statements that he would not attend a public hearing, which meant he would not give evidence or be cross-examined. The tribunal considered lesser case management measures but decided they would not be effective, and concluded that strikeout was a proportionate response.

The claimant's own application to strike out the response was refused. The tribunal said there was nothing before it to support that application and that it too contained prejudicial statements amounting to scandalous and unreasonable conduct.