Dr C Churchill v University of Salford — 2026

Employment Judge Shotter struck out Dr C Churchill’s breach of contract claim against the University of Salford following the preliminary hearing on 24 August 2026. The tribunal refused her application to adjourn. It found that she had not supplied the requested information about another hearing or explained why it should take precedence; during the hearing, the tribunal learnt that the other hearing was to take place that afternoon.

The breach of contract claim concerned the university preventing Churchill from accessing data and work produced during her employment. An order made on 4 July 2025 required her to identify the contractual terms allegedly breached by 29 August 2025. The tribunal found that she had not supplied that information despite correspondence, strike-out applications and a previous warning. Although she maintained that she had complied, she could not identify or produce the relevant correspondence. She also could not explain the claim at the hearing, including after an adjournment allowed for that purpose.

The tribunal found that Churchill’s conduct of the proceedings was scandalous, unreasonable and vexatious, and that her persistent disregard of orders had delayed the case and disadvantaged the university. It concluded that a fair hearing of the breach of contract claim was no longer possible. Having considered a further warning and a costs order as lesser sanctions, it held that strike-out was proportionate under Rule 38(1)(b), (c), (d) and (e).

The tribunal declined to strike out the automatic unfair dismissal claim under section 103A, whistleblowing detriment claim and unlawful deduction of wages claim at this stage. Churchill had not served her witness statement by the ordered exchange date of 24 April 2026, and the tribunal found no order supporting her assertion that exchange was due on 13 October 2026. Taking account of the public interest in determining whistleblowing complaints, her status as a litigant in person and the severity of striking out all claims, it gave her a final opportunity to comply. She was required to serve her statement within 14 days after the judgment was sent to the parties, failing which the remaining claims would automatically be struck out. Their merits were not decided.

No monetary award was made in this judgment. The tribunal directed that a three-hour costs hearing be listed to decide whether Churchill should pay all or part of the university’s costs arising from her unreasonable conduct. That hearing would take place after the final hearing, or earlier if the remaining claims were struck out. The judge hearing costs would remain free to make no costs order.