Mr O Nnamuchi v Ms D McGuire — 2025

At the preliminary hearing in Dundee on 16 April 2025, Employment Judge A Kemp considered strike out, a possible deposit order, joinder with another case, and the claimant's oral application for expenses. The claimant and respondent were both party litigants. The case had originally been presented in Nottingham and transferred to Scotland. The tribunal noted the claimant had previously pursued proceedings against myCare Tayside Limited in case 8000171/2022, and that the present respondent had acted as solicitor for that employer in the earlier litigation.

The tribunal held that, at its highest, the present claim sought to advance direct discrimination, indirect discrimination, harassment and victimisation claims under the Equality Act 2010. The claimant could not clearly explain the basis of the claims when asked at the hearing. The tribunal found no legal basis for any intellectual property complaint in the Employment Tribunal, no identifiable provision, criterion or practice for indirect discrimination, no protected act for victimisation, and no intelligible link between the respondent's conduct and the claimant's religion or belief. It also held that the claimant's attempt to raise the matter separately from the original claim, rather than in that claim, and his pursuit of two separate proceedings in different jurisdictions, made the claim vexatious.

Applying Rule 38(1)(c) and the overriding objective in Rule 3, and taking account of the caution required before striking out discrimination claims, the tribunal concluded that the claim had no reasonable prospects of success and had been conducted vexatiously. It therefore struck out the claim and did not go on to determine the deposit order or case-combining applications. The claimant's request for expenses of the transfer from Nottingham to Scotland was refused because the Nottingham Tribunal had jurisdiction and had granted the transfer application, so there was no basis for an expenses award against the respondent.