Practice and Procedure – Striking-Out/Dismissal
The Appellant brought two sets of proceedings in the ET alleging numerous forms of discrimination in long, repetitive pleadings which were very difficult to follow. The EJ struck out any claims of sex discrimination or sexual harassment on the basis that they had no reasonable prospects of success. Other types of claim were made the subject of deposit orders and others were allowed to proceed unconditionally.
Although the sex discrimination and sexual harassment claims were certainly not properly particularised it was wrong to say that there were no acts alleged to have involved sex discrimination or sexual harassment or that there were no facts from which such discrimination or harassment might be inferred. Further, the EJ did not expressly consider whether, even if on the current state of the papers such claims had no reasonable prospects of success, it was just to strike them out in all the circumstances at this stage in the proceedings, particularly given that many types of claim arising from the same story were proceeding, and there were insufficient grounds for inferring that the EJ had considered this second stage.
Striking out was therefore an error of law and the claims would be remitted to whichever judge was responsible for case management of the Appellant’s complaints.
Citations:
[2019] UKEAT 0178 – 19 – 1111
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.646862