Claimant v Kier Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Struck out for failure to comply with tribunal orders and having no reasonable prospect of success. Despite multiple case management hearings and written orders, the claimant was unable to articulate specific acts of disability discrimination or explain the link between her disability and the alleged acts.
Claim remains live but claimant struggled to identify the PCP relied upon. Tribunal allowed limited particularisation of four reasonable adjustments sought but case management issues remain unresolved.
Direct race discrimination claim remains unparticularised but has not been struck out at this stage. Claimant unable to show nexus between treatment and race.
Harassment claim partially identified (reference to 'spice girls' comment acknowledged) but claimant remained vague on other allegations. Claim proceeding to case management.
Claimant failed to identify the protected act relied upon and failed to particularise the detriment suffered, but claim not struck out at this stage.
Claim identified and particularised in case management hearing on 1 July 2025 and allowed to proceed to final hearing.
S.103A ERA automatic unfair dismissal claim for protected disclosure identified and particularised, allowed to proceed to case management and final hearing.
S.47B ERA detriment from whistleblowing claim identified and particularised in case management, allowed to proceed to final hearing.
Claimant failed to identify specific contractual term breached or detriment resulting from breach, but claim not struck out at this stage.
Arrears of pay claim brought in first ET1 form (3309200/2024) but not further particularised in judgment.
Facts
The claimant brought two consolidated claims alleging race and disability discrimination, reasonable adjustments, arrears of pay, unfair dismissal and whistleblowing. Despite four case management hearings and multiple orders requiring her to particularise her claims, she was unable to articulate the legal basis of several claims, particularly direct disability discrimination. The tribunal attempted to extract details both in writing and verbally but the claimant could not provide coherent explanations of the specific allegations, PCPs, or legal elements required.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the direct disability discrimination claim for failure to comply with orders and having no reasonable prospect of success. The tribunal also barred the claimant from bringing any further amendments or additional claims. The remaining particularised claims (unfair dismissal, automatic unfair dismissal for whistleblowing, detriment from whistleblowing, and failure to make reasonable adjustments) were allowed to proceed to case management and final hearing.
Practical note
Even unrepresented claimants must be able to articulate the legal basis of their claims after reasonable assistance; tribunals will reluctantly strike out claims where repeated attempts to obtain particularisation fail and further indulgence would be disproportionate and prevent a fair hearing.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3309200/2024
- Decision date
- 6 November 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Name
- Kier Limited
- Sector
- construction
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No