Threatening emails and abuse of witnesses: claim struck out as vexatious
A former employee who sent threatening emails to colleagues and called a witness a liar outside the tribunal room had his unfair dismissal claim struck out. The tribunal said a fair trial was no longer possible.
2 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant sent threatening emails to former colleagues on 2 March 2023.
- The claimant called a witness a liar outside the tribunal hearing room while the witness was still under oath.
- The claimant made serious and unfounded allegations of professional misconduct against the respondent's legal representatives.
- The claimant's conduct was found to be scandalous, unreasonable, and vexatious.
- The tribunal concluded that a fair trial was no longer possible due to the claimant's conduct.
- The claim was struck out under Rule 37(1)(b) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.
Timeline
-
Conversation with line manager
The claimant had a conversation with his line manager Kevin Coulthard, which the claimant recorded covertly. The respondent later described the conversation as 'emotional and heated'.
-
Threatening email to line manager
The claimant sent an email to Mr Coulthard stating he had a plan and urging de-escalation, but with a threatening tone.
-
Claimant's son died
The claimant's son was tragically killed in a road traffic accident.
-
Email to People Director
The claimant emailed Stephanie Johnson, stating his intention to 'annoy, antagonise, disrupt and undermine'.
-
Email to former colleague
The claimant emailed Paul Birch saying, 'If it's pain you want, then it's pain I'll give you'.
-
Dismissal
The respondent dismissed the claimant, citing his reaction to the grievance outcome and his behaviour.
-
Case management hearing
Employment Judge Feeney conducted a preliminary hearing and explained due process to the claimant.
-
Threatening emails to witnesses
The claimant sent threatening emails to Mr Coulthard, Mr Birch, and Mr Burgess, stating he would seek their dismissal and had a journalist lined up.
-
First strike-out hearing adjourned
The hearing was adjourned because the claimant had not served his 86-page submissions and lever arch file on the respondent in advance.
-
Abuse of witness outside tribunal
The claimant called Mr Coulthard a liar outside the tribunal hearing room while Mr Coulthard was still under oath.
-
Strike-out hearing concluded
The tribunal heard closing submissions and reserved judgment.
-
Judgment sent to parties
The tribunal sent the judgment striking out the claim and the costs judgment to the parties.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claim should be struck out because the way the former employee conducted the proceedings was scandalous, unreasonable, or vexatious, and whether a fair trial was still possible.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the former employee's claims for disability discrimination, detriment, and unfair dismissal.
The key reason was that his conduct — sending threatening emails to potential witnesses, making serious and unfounded allegations of professional misconduct against the respondent's legal team, and calling a witness a liar outside the hearing room while the witness was still under oath — was scandalous, unreasonable, and vexatious. The tribunal concluded that a fair trial was no longer possible.
No compensation was awarded as the claim was struck out before a full hearing.
Lessons & takeaways
- Tribunals can strike out a claim entirely if your conduct during proceedings is found to be scandalous, unreasonable, or vexatious.
- Threatening emails to witnesses or colleagues, even outside the workplace, can be used as evidence of vexatious conduct.
- Making unfounded allegations of professional misconduct against the other side's legal team can damage your credibility and lead to strike-out.
- Abusing a witness outside the tribunal room while they are still giving evidence is a serious breach of tribunal decorum.
- If you have a disability that affects your behaviour, ensure the tribunal is aware and consider whether reasonable adjustments could help you comply with expected standards.
What this case shows
This case illustrates how a claimant's own behaviour during tribunal proceedings can derail their case entirely, regardless of the merits of their original claims. The former employee had brought claims for disability discrimination, detriment, and unfair dismissal against Amey Services Limited. But instead of focusing on the legal issues, his conduct — including sending threatening emails to former colleagues and a witness, and calling a witness a liar outside the hearing room — led the tribunal to strike out the entire claim.
The tribunal found that the former employee's actions were not just ill-advised but scandalous, unreasonable, and vexatious. He had emailed a former colleague saying 'If it's pain you want, then it's pain I'll give you', and told the People Director he intended to 'annoy, antagonise, disrupt and undermine'. He also made serious and unfounded allegations of professional misconduct against the respondent's legal representatives.
What the losing side could have done differently
The former employee was representing himself, which can be challenging. However, the tribunal noted he was intelligent and capable of understanding complex legal issues. He had also been warned at an earlier hearing about proper conduct. The key mistake was failing to control his behaviour — particularly the threatening emails and the outburst outside the tribunal room. Even if he felt strongly about his case, such conduct is likely to be seen as an abuse of process.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a reminder that employment tribunals expect all parties to behave reasonably and respectfully. If a claimant's conduct makes a fair trial impossible, the tribunal can strike out the claim — even if the underlying allegations might have had some merit. For anyone considering bringing a claim, it is essential to communicate calmly, avoid threats, and treat witnesses and legal representatives with respect. If you have a disability that affects your behaviour, you should raise this with the tribunal early so they can consider whether any adjustments are needed.
Similar cases
Strike-out of disability discrimination claim against CEO: no specific allegations
A former employee's disability discrimination claim against the CEO of CSH Surrey was struck out after she failed to particularise any specific allegations against him. The tribunal found the claim had no reasonable prospects of success.
HR Business Partner's disability and whistleblowing claims allowed to proceed despite strike-out bid
A tribunal has refused an employer's attempt to strike out claims of disability discrimination and victimisation brought by an autistic HR Business Partner who was dismissed after raising concerns about missing right-to-work documents.
Head teacher's discrimination and whistleblowing claims survive strike-out bid
An employment tribunal has refused to strike out most claims brought by a former head teacher against Darul Uloom Al Arabiya Al Islamia, including allegations of disability discrimination and whistleblowing detriment. However, the reasonable adjustments claim was ordered to be subject to a deposit order hearing.
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.