Cases2301068/2023

Claimant v London General Transport Services Limited

31 July 2025Before Employment Judge McCannLondon Southremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Discrimination Arising from Disability (s.15)(disability)struck out

Struck out under Rule 38(1)(d) for failure to actively pursue the claim. The claimant showed complete lack of engagement, failing to attend two hearings, failing to comply with any tribunal orders, and having no contact with the tribunal for over two years since filing the claim in March 2023.

Unlawful Deduction from Wagesstruck out

Struck out under Rule 38(1)(d) for failure to actively pursue the claim. The claimant provided no details of when deductions occurred or amounts involved, failed to provide ordered Further Information, and showed complete disengagement from the tribunal process over more than two years.

Facts

The claimant, a bus driver employed since 2007, filed claims for disability discrimination and unlawful deduction of wages in March 2023, naming an RMT union representative. However, neither the claimant nor his representative attended two tribunal hearings (May 2025 and July 2025), failed to comply with any case management orders including orders to provide Further Information, and had no contact whatsoever with the tribunal for over two years. The claimant remained in employment throughout and there was no evidence of illness or inability to participate.

Decision

The tribunal struck out the entire claim under Rule 38(1)(d) for failure to actively pursue it. Despite acknowledging that strike out is draconian and that unless orders should normally be attempted first, the judge concluded this was an exceptional case given the complete lack of engagement over more than two years. The judge determined that an unless order would serve no useful purpose and that a fair hearing was no longer possible given the lack of particularisation of the claims.

Practical note

Complete non-engagement with the tribunal process for over two years, including failing to attend hearings and comply with orders, can justify strike out without first issuing an unless order in exceptional cases where there is no realistic prospect of the claimant now engaging.

Legal authorities cited

Baber v Royal Bank of Scotland UKEAT/031/15Khan v London Borough of Barnet UKEAT/0002/18Leeks v University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2024] EAT 134Forrest v Amazon Web Services EMEA Sarl UK Branch [2025] EAT 81

Statutes

Equality Act 2010Employment Tribunal Rules 2024 Rule 47Employment Tribunal Rules 2024 Rule 38(1)(d)

Case details

Case number
2301068/2023
Decision date
31 July 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
transport
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
bus driver

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
union