Claim struck out after repeated failures to comply with tribunal orders
A former employee's unfair dismissal and discrimination claims have been struck out after she repeatedly failed to comply with tribunal orders to provide further information, despite having legal representation throughout.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant's employment terminated on 19 September 2019.
- The claimant presented an ET1 on 23 December 2019 with a 11-page particulars of claim.
- The claimant was legally represented throughout the proceedings.
- The claimant failed to provide further information ordered by the tribunal on multiple occasions.
- The respondent made a strike out application which was granted.
- The respondent's wasted costs application against the claimant's representative was refused.
Timeline
-
Employment terminated
The claimant's employment with the respondent ended.
-
Acas early conciliation started
The claimant engaged in Acas early conciliation.
-
Acas early conciliation ended
The Acas early conciliation period ended.
-
ET1 presented
The claimant presented her claim form and particulars of claim.
-
First preliminary hearing
Employment Judge Tsamados held a preliminary hearing and ordered the claimant to provide further information.
-
Second preliminary hearing
A preliminary hearing was held; the claimant's counsel stated robust advice had been given about deficiencies.
-
Respondent's strike out application
The respondent applied to strike out the claim.
-
Strike out hearing
Employment Judge Wright heard the strike out application and wasted costs application.
-
Judgment issued
The tribunal struck out the claim in its entirety and refused the wasted costs application.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether to strike out the claim for unreasonable conduct, non-compliance with orders, and failure to pursue the claim, and whether to make a wasted costs order against the claimant's legal representative.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the entire claim. The key reasons were:
- The claimant failed to provide further information ordered by the tribunal on multiple occasions, despite having legal representation.
- The manner in which the proceedings were conducted was unreasonable.
- The claim was not actively pursued.
The respondent's application for a wasted costs order against the claimant's representative was refused.
No compensation was awarded as the claim was struck out.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you are bringing a claim, comply with tribunal orders promptly and fully, especially if you have legal representation.
- Failing to provide further information when ordered can lead to your entire claim being struck out.
- Tribunals expect claimants to actively pursue their claims; delays and non-compliance can be fatal.
- Having a lawyer does not guarantee your claim will survive if you or your lawyer fail to follow tribunal directions.
This case shows how failing to comply with tribunal orders can derail an employment claim, even when the claimant has a lawyer. The former employee brought claims for unfair dismissal, race and sex discrimination, and other complaints. However, from the start, her case was plagued by deficiencies in how it was pleaded.
At the first preliminary hearing, the tribunal ordered her to provide further information to clarify her claims. Despite having legal representation, she did not comply. Over the next two years, she had at least six opportunities to provide the required details, but she never did. The tribunal noted that even at the strike-out hearing, there was still no written application to amend her claim.
What the tribunal said
The judge was critical of the claimant's conduct, describing a 'wilful disregard' of what was required. The tribunal found that the claimant's conduct was unreasonable, she failed to comply with orders, and she did not actively pursue her claim. As a result, the entire claim was struck out.
What could have been done differently
The claimant could have avoided this outcome by simply providing the further information the tribunal ordered. Her lawyer could have drafted a clear application to amend the claim. Instead, the case dragged on for nearly three years, wasting the tribunal's time and the respondent's resources.
Why this matters
This case is a reminder that tribunals expect claimants to follow directions and actively progress their cases. Non-compliance, especially when repeated, can lead to strike-out, regardless of the merits of the underlying claim. Claimants should take tribunal orders seriously and seek legal advice if they are unsure what is required.
Similar cases
Security guard's discrimination claim struck out for failing to comply with tribunal orders
A security guard who alleged race and sex discrimination by a senior officer had her entire claim dismissed after repeatedly failing to provide a list of documents as ordered by the tribunal.
Claim struck out for failing to comply with tribunal orders
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim against Gateshead Health NHS Foundation Trust was struck out after he failed to comply with tribunal orders and did not respond to correspondence. He was ordered to pay £187.50 in costs.
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.
Former employees' claims struck out after unreasonable conduct made fair hearing impossible
A tribunal struck out all claims brought by four former employees of the Disclosure and Barring Service, finding their conduct of the litigation was so unreasonable that a fair hearing was no longer possible.