Ms J Burrell v Sinclair Pharmaceuticals Ltd and 4 others — 2026

At this preliminary case-management hearing, the First Respondent applied to strike out the claim because the Claimant continued to instruct Mr Gorton KC after he had read documents known as the 1 May Materials while representing her in related High Court proceedings. The Tribunal dismissed the strike-out application. It recorded that privilege had been asserted over the materials and remained disputed, but did not determine their privileged status or admissibility.

The Tribunal found that neither gateway under rule 38 was established. Mr Gorton KC had read the materials while responding to High Court proceedings initiated by the First Respondent, and the Tribunal did not consider his conduct in that context capable of constituting scandalous, unreasonable or vexatious conduct of the Employment Tribunal proceedings. It found no authority establishing that he owed the First Respondent the specific duty of confidence alleged, while noting his duty to the court and the undertakings given by the Claimant and her solicitors. The Tribunal also found no tenable basis for suggesting that he would improperly use the materials and concluded that his continued instruction did not prevent a fair preliminary or final hearing. It added that, even if the rule 38(1)(b) gateway had been met, striking out would have been disproportionate because a fair hearing remained possible.

The Claimant's breach of contract complaint was dismissed upon withdrawal and was not determined on its merits. No monetary remedy was considered or awarded in this judgment. The other substantive complaints referred to in the wider proceedings were not adjudicated at this hearing.