Cases3305587/2024

Claimant v B & M Retail Limited

17 July 2025Before Employment Judge LaidlerBury St Edmundsremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Direct Discrimination(race)struck out

Struck out under Rule 38 for failure to provide sufficient particulars despite repeated tribunal orders and no reasonable prospect of success. The claim form provided no details from which race discrimination could be discerned, and the claimant failed to comply with case management orders to provide further information. The respondent was entitled to know the claim it had to meet.

Facts

The claimant was offered a role by the respondent with a specific shift pattern but wanted different hours which were not available. He did not accept the offer and employment never commenced. He brought a race discrimination claim but provided no particulars in box 8.2 of the ET1. Despite a tribunal order for further information and repeated requests from the respondent, the claimant failed to provide adequate details. He mentioned a telephone call on 16 April 2024 where a respondent representative referred to two Africans named Peter, which he found disrespectful.

Decision

The tribunal struck out the race discrimination claim under Rule 38 for non-compliance with case management orders and because there was nothing in the claim form pointing to race discrimination. The respondent was entitled to know the claim it had to meet and the claimant had failed to provide sufficient particulars despite repeated opportunities. The claim would proceed no further.

Practical note

A claimant must provide sufficient particulars of discrimination claims and comply with tribunal orders for further information, or face strike out even without an unless order.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Rule 38 Employment Tribunal Rules 2024Rule 3 Employment Tribunal Rules 2024

Case details

Case number
3305587/2024
Decision date
17 July 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
retail
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No