Race discrimination claim struck out after claimant failed to attend hearings
A team leader who alleged he was dismissed because of his race had his claim struck out after missing two preliminary hearings and failing to respond to tribunal correspondence.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Team Leader from 11 January 2021 to 29 January 2021.
- The claimant alleged he was dismissed because of his race and that a manager said only local white workers should be employed.
- The claimant failed to attend two preliminary hearings on 16 September 2021 and 21 March 2022.
- The claimant's solicitors failed to respond to tribunal correspondence and comply with case management orders.
- The respondent did not file a response to the claim but participated in hearings.
- The tribunal struck out the claim for not being actively pursued and refused reconsideration.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began work as a Tester at a Covid testing station, later appointed Team Leader.
-
Dismissal
Claimant was dismissed; he alleges a manager said only local white workers should be employed.
-
Claim form sent to respondent
Tribunal sent the claim form to the respondent's registered office.
-
First preliminary hearing
Claimant's representative did not attend; tribunal attempted to call but wrong number provided.
-
Second preliminary hearing listed
Parties informed of preliminary hearing on 21 March 2022 and final hearing on 25-26 August 2022.
-
Tribunal requested readiness confirmation
Tribunal asked parties to confirm readiness by 1 March 2022; no response.
-
Second preliminary hearing
Neither party attended; Employment Judge Britton made an unless order.
-
Strike out judgment
Employment Judge Gardiner struck out the claim for not being actively pursued.
-
Judgment sent to parties
Strike out judgment sent to parties.
-
Reconsideration application
Claimant applied for reconsideration, citing administrative errors by solicitors.
-
Reconsideration refused
Employment Judge Gardiner refused the reconsideration application.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claim should be struck out for lack of active pursuit and whether the strike out judgment should be reconsidered in the interests of justice.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the claim under Rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013 on the basis that it was not being actively pursued. The claimant failed to attend two preliminary hearings and did not respond to a tribunal letter asking for confirmation of readiness. The tribunal also refused the claimant's application for reconsideration, finding that the interests of justice did not require setting aside the strike out.
No compensation was awarded as the claim was struck out.
Lessons & takeaways
- Attending all tribunal hearings is essential — missing even one can lead to your claim being struck out.
- If your solicitors make administrative errors, you may still be held responsible for the progress of your case.
- Respond promptly to tribunal correspondence; failure to do so can be seen as a lack of active pursuit.
- A strike out for non-attendance is difficult to overturn on reconsideration unless there is a very good reason for the failures.
What this case shows
This case illustrates how a potentially serious discrimination claim can collapse if the claimant does not engage with the tribunal process. The team leader alleged that he was dismissed after just 18 days because of his race — a manager reportedly said only local white workers should be employed. However, the tribunal never reached the merits of that allegation because the claimant failed to attend two preliminary hearings and ignored a letter asking whether he was ready to proceed.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant's solicitors blamed administrative errors for the missed hearings and lack of response. But the tribunal noted that the claimant had provided a wrong telephone number and that his representatives did not comply with case management orders. If the claimant or his solicitors had kept in touch with the tribunal, explained any difficulties, or simply attended the hearings, the case could have progressed to a full hearing.
Why this matters
The tribunal's decision to strike out the claim — and refuse reconsideration — shows that the rules on active pursuit are enforced strictly. Even a strong discrimination claim can be lost if the claimant does not participate. For anyone bringing a tribunal claim, this is a reminder that the process requires consistent engagement from start to finish. Blaming solicitors after the event is unlikely to persuade a tribunal to reinstate a struck-out claim.
Similar cases
Server's unfair dismissal claim struck out after failing to engage with tribunal
A restaurant server with less than two years' service had his unfair dismissal claim struck out after he failed to attend hearings or comply with tribunal orders. The tribunal also dismissed his race discrimination claim due to unreasonable conduct.
Claims struck out after claimant and representative fail to attend hearing
A former employee's race and sex discrimination claims were struck out after she and her representative failed to attend a preliminary hearing without explanation. A later bid to reinstate the case was refused.
Claim struck out after former employee failed to attend hearing
A former employee's claims for unfair dismissal and discrimination were struck out after he failed to attend a telephone hearing and did not comply with orders to explain his absence.
Former employee's unfair dismissal claim struck out for lack of two years' service
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim against Kings College London was struck out because they did not have the required two years' service. Their discrimination claims were dismissed after a hearing.