Claim struck out after claimant refused to engage with tribunal process
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim was struck out after he deliberately ignored tribunal orders and refused to communicate with his employer, Whittington Health NHS Trust.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant failed to comply with tribunal orders to file a schedule of loss and provide details of his discrimination claim.
- The claimant did not respond to the respondent's emails chasing these matters.
- The claimant admitted he intentionally did not engage with the respondent because he disliked them.
- The claimant misunderstood the tribunal process, believing he could present his case orally at the hearing.
- The claimant's discrimination claim was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as it was based on professional qualifications, not a protected characteristic.
- The claim was ultimately struck out for failure to comply with an order to exchange witness statements and for not actively pursuing the case.
Timeline
-
Tribunal orders issued
The tribunal issued orders requiring the claimant to file a schedule of loss and provide details of any discrimination claim.
-
Respondent's first chase email
The respondent emailed the claimant chasing compliance with the tribunal orders.
-
Respondent's second chase email
The respondent sent a further email to the claimant regarding compliance.
-
Respondent's third chase email
The respondent sent another email to the claimant about the outstanding orders.
-
Strike out application
The respondent applied to strike out the claimant's claim due to non-compliance and lack of active pursuit.
-
Preliminary hearing
Employment Judge Anderson heard the strike out application and refused it, but dismissed the discrimination claim for lack of jurisdiction.
-
Judgment sent to parties
The judgment from the preliminary hearing was sent to the parties.
-
Notice of strike out
The tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to show cause why the claim should not be struck out for failing to comply with the order to exchange witness statements.
-
Claim struck out
Employment Judge McTigue struck out the claim as the claimant failed to respond to the notice.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether to strike out the claim for non-compliance with orders and lack of active pursuit, and whether it had jurisdiction over a discrimination claim based on professional qualifications.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the former employee's unfair dismissal claim after he failed to comply with orders to exchange witness statements and did not respond to a notice to show cause why the claim should not be struck out. Earlier, the tribunal had dismissed his discrimination claim for lack of jurisdiction, as it was based on professional qualifications rather than a protected characteristic.
- The claimant admitted he intentionally did not engage with the respondent because he disliked them.
- He misunderstood the tribunal process, believing he could present his case orally at the hearing.
- No compensation was awarded as the claim was struck out.
Lessons & takeaways
- Tribunal orders must be followed strictly; ignoring them can lead to your claim being struck out.
- Deliberately refusing to engage with the other side because of personal feelings is not a valid excuse and can harm your case.
- If you are unsure about the process, seek advice early rather than assuming you can explain everything at the hearing.
- Discrimination claims must be based on a protected characteristic (e.g., age, race, disability), not on professional qualifications.
This case shows how a claimant's misunderstanding of the tribunal process, combined with a deliberate refusal to engage, can lead to a claim being struck out entirely. The former employee admitted he intentionally did not respond to the respondent's emails because he disliked the organisation, and he believed he could simply present his case orally at the hearing without following procedural steps.
The tribunal initially gave the claimant a chance, refusing to strike out the claim at an early stage and explaining the process to him. However, when he later failed to comply with an order to exchange witness statements and did not respond to a notice to show cause, the tribunal had no choice but to strike out the claim. This outcome could have been avoided if the claimant had engaged with the process, even if he felt aggrieved by his former employer.
For anyone considering bringing a tribunal claim, this case is a reminder that the employment tribunal is a formal legal process. Orders must be complied with, and communication with the other side is expected. A failure to engage, especially when intentional, is likely to be treated seriously and can result in the loss of the claim without any hearing on the merits. The discrimination claim was also dismissed because it was based on professional qualifications, which is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010.
Similar cases
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.
COVID test grievance claim struck out as out of time and lacking merit
A former employee who claimed he was victimised for leaving work to take a COVID-19 test had his case struck out for being out of time and having no reasonable prospect of success. He was also ordered to pay £50,186.50 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.
Claim struck out after former employee failed to comply with tribunal orders
An employment tribunal struck out a former employee's unfair dismissal claim after she failed to comply with any part of a case management order, leading to cancellation of the full hearing.