Chambers-Mills v Allied Bakeries: CA 26 Nov 2009

The claimant renewed orally her request for leave to appeal against the EAT which had upheld loss of her claim, after the Employment Tribunal had found her conduct of the proceedings unreasonable in failing to co-operate in a medical enquiry into her discrimination.
Held: The test in Blockbuster was applicable and had been correctly applied. However she had not been given sufficient notice that her application might be struck out, and leave was given.
Etherton LJ
[2009] EWCA Civ 1414
England and Wales
CitedBlockbuster Entertainment Ltd v James CA 25-May-2006
The defendant company appealed against an order re-instating the claimants’ claims for damages for race discrimination and victimisation after they had been struck out for wilful disobedience of the tribunal’s orders.
Held: When making a . .
Appeal fromChambers-Mills v Allied Bakeries EAT 18-Nov-2008
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Striking-out/dismissal
The Appellant appealed a strike out order, but the correct authority (Blockbuster) was applied and there was (i) no perversity in the ET’s findings of . .

Cited by:
Leave grantedChambers-Mills v Allied Bakeries CA 21-Feb-2011
The claimant appealed against the strike out of her case for failing to comply with an order requiring her to submit to medical examination and otherwise to pursue her disability discrimination claim.
Held: The claimant’s further application . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 February 2021; Ref: scu.392661