Cases3306423/2024

Claimant v Franklin Silencers Ltd

11 November 2025Before Employment Judge Quillon papers

Outcome

Other

Individual claims

Discrimination Arising from Disability (s.15)(disability)not determined

The claimant died on 10 June 2025 before the substantive claim was heard. This judgment relates only to a costs application arising from postponement of a preliminary hearing.

Harassment(disability)not determined

The claim for harassment related to disability was not determined as the claimant died before the merits hearing took place.

Facts

The claimant brought disability discrimination and harassment claims. Case management orders were made on 18 December 2024 requiring both parties to take steps by specified dates, with a preliminary hearing listed for 15 May 2025. The claimant provided further particulars and an impact statement on 19 February 2025 but did not provide medical records as ordered. The respondent failed to respond to correspondence. On 13 May 2025, the claimant applied to strike out the response. On 14 May 2025 (less than 7 days before the hearing), the respondent applied to postpone, which was granted. The claimant died on 10 June 2025. The claimant's estate applied for £300 plus VAT costs for the postponement.

Decision

The tribunal refused the costs application. Although the respondent's postponement application was made late and the reasons for the delay were inadequate, the judge found the claimant's solicitors had contributed to the situation by applying for strike-out on 13 May while themselves in breach of the order to supply medical evidence, potentially misleading both the respondent and the tribunal. There was fault on both sides.

Practical note

When applying for strike-out or costs based on an opponent's non-compliance with orders, representatives must ensure they themselves have complied with all relevant orders and clearly state any ongoing breaches of their own obligations.

Legal authorities cited

Yerrakalva v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council [2012] ICR 420

Statutes

Rule 74Rule 82Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure Rule 72-82

Case details

Case number
3306423/2024
Decision date
11 November 2025
Hearing type
costs
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
manufacturing
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor