Contract worker's disability discrimination claim struck out: no employer relationship pleaded
A contract worker's claim of disability discrimination against an employment business and a medical assessment company was struck out after the tribunal found he had not pleaded that either was his employer or principal under the Equality Act.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #disability-discrimination
- #unfair-dismissal
- #strike-out
- #employment-business
- #section-15-equality-act
- #no-reasonable-prospect
Key facts
- The claimant was engaged by Vital Human Resources Ltd, an employment business, and placed with Network Rail.
- Neither respondent was the claimant's employer for the purposes of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
- The claimant's disability discrimination claim was based on Section 15 of the Equality Act 2010.
- The claimant did not plead that either respondent fell within the capacity sections (39, 41, or 111) of the Equality Act.
- The unfair dismissal claim was withdrawn by consent.
- The discrimination claims were struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success.
Timeline
-
Claimant engaged by R2
The claimant was engaged by Vital Human Resources Ltd (R2) and placed with Network Rail.
-
Medical examination by R1
The claimant was examined by Express Medicals Ltd (R1) for RISQS certification.
-
Previous certification expired
The claimant's most recent RISQS certification expired in early December 2022.
-
Claimant's further information filed
The claimant filed a response (ET3 Riposte) to the respondents' grounds of resistance.
-
Preliminary hearing
A preliminary hearing was held at Leeds Employment Tribunal by video.
-
Judgment issued
Employment Judge R S Drake issued a reserved judgment striking out the discrimination claims and dismissing the unfair dismissal claim on withdrawal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's claims of disability discrimination under Section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 had any reasonable prospect of success, given that he did not plead that either respondent was his employer, principal, or otherwise fell within the capacity sections of the Act.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the claimant's disability discrimination claims under Section 15 of the Equality Act 2010, finding they had no reasonable prospect of success.
The key reason was that the claimant did not plead that either respondent was his employer, principal, or otherwise fell within the capacity sections (39, 41, or 111) of the Equality Act, which are necessary to bring a discrimination claim.
The unfair dismissal claim was withdrawn by consent as neither respondent was the claimant's employer under the Employment Rights Act 1996.
No compensation was awarded as the claims were struck out before trial.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you are a contract worker, check whether the organisation you are complaining about is your employer, principal, or otherwise covered by the Equality Act before bringing a discrimination claim.
- Employment businesses and medical assessment companies may not be liable for disability discrimination if they are not your employer or principal under the Act.
- A claim that has no reasonable prospect of success may be struck out early, saving time and costs, but also means you lose the chance to argue your case.
- Lay representatives should ensure that the legal basis of a claim is properly pleaded, including the capacity of the respondent, to avoid strike-out.
This case highlights a fundamental hurdle for contract workers bringing discrimination claims: the need to establish that the respondent is an employer, principal, or otherwise within the scope of the Equality Act 2010.
The claimant was a contract worker placed by an employment business with Network Rail. After a medical assessment company refused to certify his fitness to work, he brought claims of disability discrimination and unfair dismissal against both the employment business and the medical company. However, he did not plead that either was his employer or principal, and the tribunal found that the claims had no reasonable prospect of success.
What the tribunal decided
The tribunal struck out the discrimination claims at a preliminary hearing, ruling that the claimant had not established the necessary legal relationship. The unfair dismissal claim was withdrawn by consent because neither respondent was his employer under the Employment Rights Act 1996.
What could have been done differently
The claimant could have sought legal advice to ensure his claim was properly pleaded. A clearer explanation of how each respondent fell within the capacity sections of the Equality Act might have saved the claim from being struck out. Alternatively, he could have considered bringing a claim against the end user, Network Rail, if they were his principal.
Why this matters
This case serves as a reminder that discrimination claims require a solid legal foundation. Contract workers should carefully identify who is responsible for the alleged discrimination and ensure that the respondent is in the right legal capacity. Early legal advice can prevent wasted time and costs on claims that are unlikely to succeed.
Similar cases
Strike-out for deaf former employee who tried to add new claims late
A tribunal struck out a deaf former employee's disability discrimination claim after she failed to comply with directions and attempted to add new claims that went beyond her original ET1.
Former employee's unfair dismissal and disability claims struck out after failure to engage with tribunal
A tribunal struck out a former employee's claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination after she admitted inappropriate touching, failed to attend hearings, and ignored tribunal communications.
Disability discrimination claim based on mother's disability struck out
A tribunal struck out a former employee's claim that she was discriminated against because of her caring responsibilities for her disabled mother, ruling that section 15 of the Equality Act does not cover discrimination by association.
Claim struck out after failure to comply with tribunal orders due to ill-health
A former employee's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims against Marks and Spencer were struck out after she failed to comply with tribunal orders and did not actively pursue her claim.