Claimant v Vascutek Limited t/a Terumo Aortic
Outcome
Individual claims
Tribunal struck out allegations (f), (g), (j) and (l) for lack of specification or no reasonable prospect of success. Allegations (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (h), (i) and (k) permitted to proceed to full hearing due to material factual disputes requiring evidence.
Same allegations (f), (g), (j) and (l) struck out for harassment claim as for direct discrimination. Remaining allegations permitted to proceed to full hearing due to disputed facts.
Facts
Claimant, a Brazilian woman, brought claims of direct race discrimination and harassment following her dismissal in August 2024 for allegedly working abroad (in Greece) without permission and misleading her manager about her whereabouts. She alleged numerous instances of less favourable treatment including dismissal, performance management, parking restrictions, comments about her language and cultural differences, and denial of training. The respondent applied to strike out the claims or alternatively for a deposit order. The claimant had obtained legal representation for providing further particulars but was unrepresented at the preliminary hearing.
Decision
The tribunal partially granted the strike-out application, striking out allegations (f), (g), (j) and (l) for both direct discrimination and harassment claims on grounds they lacked reasonable specification or had no reasonable prospect of success. The remaining allegations (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (h), (i) and (k) were permitted to proceed to full hearing because they involved material factual disputes. The tribunal refused the respondent's application for a deposit order.
Practical note
Even in discrimination cases which generally should not be struck out except in the clearest circumstances, tribunals will strike out specific allegations that lack proper specification in further particulars or where there is no reasonable prospect of establishing the necessary causal link to the protected characteristic, while allowing properly pleaded allegations involving disputed facts to proceed.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 8001903/2024
- Decision date
- 30 October 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Employment details
- Salary band
- £50,000–£60,000
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No