IT support technician's claim struck out after abusive conduct in tribunal
An employment tribunal struck out the entire claim of an IT support technician who called counsel 'a retard' and discussed evidence on Twitter during the hearing, ruling his conduct made a fair trial impossible.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #strike-out
- #scandalous-conduct
- #vexatious-litigant
- #social-media-abuse
- #witness-intimidation
- #litigant-in-person
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as an IT support technician from 11 September 2017 until his dismissal on 31 March 2021 for misconduct.
- The claimant was subject to three disciplinary investigations: filming a female member of the public, attending work with suspected COVID-19 symptoms, and failing to comply with sickness procedures.
- The claimant made 59 allegations of direct discrimination, harassment, and victimisation based on race, religion, and sex.
- The claimant engaged in a sustained campaign of abusive and intimidatory behaviour towards the respondent's witnesses and legal team via emails and social media.
- Despite multiple warnings and a ground rules hearing, the claimant continued to breach tribunal orders, including discussing his evidence on Twitter during the hearing.
- The tribunal struck out the entire claim on the grounds that the claimant had conducted the proceedings in a scandalous, unreasonable, and vexatious manner, making a fair trial impossible.
Timeline
-
Employment started
The claimant began working as an IT support technician at Birmingham City University.
-
First discrimination allegation
The claimant's discrimination allegations date from this day, when he was invited to an investigatory meeting.
-
Protected act
The claimant complained about harassment during a meeting, which he later relied on as a protected act for victimisation.
-
Dismissal
The claimant was dismissed by reason of misconduct, following final written warnings for two disciplinary matters.
-
Early conciliation started
Early conciliation with ACAS began.
-
Early conciliation ended
Early conciliation ended.
-
Claim presented
The claimant presented his claim form to the tribunal, alleging unfair dismissal and discrimination.
-
Judge Jones' warning
Employment Judge Jones warned the claimant not to use offensive language such as 'retarded' in correspondence.
-
Final hearing day 1
The final hearing commenced. The claimant called counsel 'a retard' and the respondent applied to strike out.
-
Final hearing day 2
The tribunal refused the first strike out application but set ground rules for conduct.
-
Final hearing day 4
The claimant breached ground rules; the tribunal gave a final warning.
-
Final hearing day 5
The claimant discussed evidence on Twitter overnight. The tribunal struck out the entire claim.
-
Judgment sent
The tribunal's written judgment was issued, striking out all claims.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's conduct during proceedings—including calling counsel 'a retard', posting about the case on Twitter, and ignoring ground rules—was so unreasonable that the entire claim should be struck out.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the entire claim for unfair dismissal and discrimination.
The key reason was that the claimant, a litigant in person, had conducted the proceedings in a scandalous, unreasonable, and vexatious manner. Despite multiple warnings and a ground rules hearing, he continued to abuse witnesses and legal representatives via email and social media, and discussed his evidence on Twitter during the hearing.
No compensation was awarded as the claim was dismissed in its entirety.
Lessons & takeaways
- Tribunals expect all parties to behave respectfully; abusive language or harassment of witnesses can lead to your claim being struck out.
- Social media posts about ongoing proceedings can be used as evidence of unreasonable conduct and may result in the loss of your case.
- If you are a litigant in person, you must still comply with tribunal orders and ground rules—ignoring them can have severe consequences.
- Making a large number of unsubstantiated allegations (here 59) can be seen as vexatious and may harm your credibility.
This case shows how a claimant's own behaviour, rather than the merits of their case, can lead to a complete loss of their claim. The IT support technician had brought claims of unfair dismissal and discrimination against Birmingham City University after being dismissed for misconduct. However, during the tribunal process, his conduct became the central issue.
What went wrong
The claimant engaged in a sustained campaign of abusive behaviour. He sent emails calling the respondent's counsel 'a retard' and made derogatory comments about witnesses. Despite being warned by a judge not to use offensive language, he continued. During the final hearing, he breached ground rules by discussing his evidence on Twitter overnight. The tribunal gave him multiple chances, but his behaviour did not improve.
The tribunal found that his conduct was scandalous, unreasonable, and vexatious. It made a fair trial impossible because the credibility of witnesses and the claimant himself was central to the case, and his abuse had intimidated the respondent's team.
What the respondent could have done differently
Birmingham City University had already tried to manage the situation by applying for a strike-out early in the hearing. The tribunal initially refused but set ground rules. The respondent's counsel acted professionally throughout. In hindsight, the respondent might have sought earlier intervention from the tribunal to prevent the escalation.
Why this matters
This case is a reminder that employment tribunals have powerful tools to deal with litigants who abuse the process. While tribunals are usually sympathetic to litigants in person, they will not tolerate behaviour that undermines the administration of justice. Anyone bringing a claim should remember that their conduct is as important as the facts of their case.
Similar cases
Employee's witness intimidation leads to claim being struck out
An employment tribunal struck out an unfair dismissal claim after the claimant harassed and intimidated a proposed witness on social media and in person.
Postman's unfair dismissal claim struck out after scandalous conduct at hearings
A postman with 16 years' service who took undelivered mail home on Christmas Eve had his unfair dismissal claim struck out after the tribunal found his conduct during proceedings was scandalous, unreasonable, and vexatious.
Claim struck out after claimant's scandalous conduct and repeated failures to comply with orders
An employment tribunal struck out an administrative assistant's unfair dismissal claim after she behaved disruptively, made unfounded allegations, and repeatedly failed to provide further particulars despite multiple orders.
Redundancy claim struck out for non-disclosure: costs of £6,853 awarded
A senior manager's unfair dismissal claim was struck out after he failed to disclose documents about his new job. The tribunal ordered him to pay £6,853 in costs for unreasonable conduct.