Claimant v Manchester Airport Plc
Outcome
Individual claims
Claims struck out under Rule 38(1)(b) due to the claimant's scandalous, unreasonable and vexatious conduct including making criminal threats of violence against the second respondent, causing her to refuse to attend to give evidence, rendering a fair trial impossible.
Struck out for the same reasons as the disability discrimination claim - claimant's conduct including threats and violence prevented the second respondent from attending as a witness.
The claimant sought to amend to add this claim but all claims were struck out due to his conduct in the proceedings which made a fair trial impossible.
The claimant sought to amend to add this claim but all claims were struck out due to his conduct in the proceedings.
The claimant sought to amend to add this claim but all claims were struck out due to his conduct in the proceedings.
Facts
The claimant was employed as an aviation security officer and was suspended in July 2023 due to concerns about his use of medicinal cannabis. Following an incident with his line manager (the second respondent) on 26 September 2023, he was suspended again, raised a grievance which was rejected, and resigned in January 2024. He then brought disability discrimination claims. Between June and August 2024 the claimant sent a series of increasingly threatening emails to both respondents, including threats to physically harm the second respondent, and on 5 August 2024 he attended the airport with a knife and caused criminal damage, for which he was convicted.
Decision
The tribunal struck out all claims under Rule 38(1)(b) because the claimant's conduct was scandalous, unreasonable and vexatious. The second respondent refused to attend to give evidence due to fear and diagnosed post-traumatic stress from the claimant's threats and violence. The tribunal found a fair trial was impossible without her evidence, and that the only proportionate response was to strike out the claims.
Practical note
Parties who engage in criminal threats and violence against respondents during tribunal proceedings will lose their right to have their claims heard, as such conduct makes a fair trial impossible and amounts to an abuse of the tribunal process.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2400496/2024
- Decision date
- 2 May 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- transport
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Aviation Security Officer
- Service
- 8 months
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No