Mr G Reid v MML Marine Ltd: 4103432/2022
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 28 April 2023 |
| Date | 28 April 2023 |
| Citation | 4103432/2022 |
| Court | Employment Tribunal |
| Published date | 22 May 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Disability Discrimination |
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND)
Case No: 4103432/2022
5
Preliminary Hearing held in Glasgow on 20 January 2023
Employment Judge Ian McPherson
Mr Gary Reid Claimant
10
In Person
MML Marine Limited Respondents
15
Represented by:
Mr Paman Singh -
Solicitor
20
JUDGMENT OF THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL
The reserved Judgment of the Employment Tribunal, having heard from the claimant
in person, and the respondents’ solicitor, at this in person, public Preliminary
Hearing, and having thereafter considered, in private deliberation in chambers, the
respondents’ written submissions, as also both parties’ oral submissions, is that:
25
(1) The Tribunal finds that the proceedings have been conducted by the claimant
in an unreasonable manner, and, in these circumstances, it is appropriate to
Strike Out the claim, in terms of Rule 37(1)(b) of the Employment Tribunal
Rules of Procedure 2013.
(2) Further, and in any event, the Tribunal finds that there has been non-
30
compliance by the claimant with orders of the Tribunal, and that the claim has
not been actively pursued by the claimant, and, in these circumstances, it is
appropriate to Strike Out the claim, in terms of Rules 37(1)(c) and (d) of the
Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.
(3) Accordingly, the claimant’s entire claim against the respondents is struck out,
35
and dismissed by the Tribunal.
4103432/2022 Page 2
REASONS
Introduction
1. This case called again before me as an Employment Judge sitting alone at
the Glasgow Employment Tribunal for a one-day public Preliminary Hearing
in person on Friday, 20 January 2023.
5
2. By Notice of Preliminary Hearing issued by the Tribunal to both parties on 8
November 2022, the Tribunal had previously assigned this further Hearing as
a 2 hour in person further Case Management Preliminary Hearing, as set
down by me at a telephone conference call Case Management Preliminary
Hearing held on 3 November 2022. My written PH Note and Orders were
10
issued to both parties on 7 November 2022.
3. At that Preliminary Hearing, on 3 November 2022, I had made case
management orders for the claimant to provide, within 4 weeks, additional
information, to clarify the factual and legal issues in dispute in the case, by
ordering him to provide further and better particulars of the disability
15
discrimination claim made against the respondents, and to provide a detailed
schedule of loss setting out the amount of compensation which he sought
from the respondents.
4. I allowed the respondents to reply, within a further 2 weeks, by intimating any
further and better particulars on their own behalf, replying to the claimant’s
20
additional information, by way of submitting amended grounds of resistance
to their ET3 response, together with a Counter Schedule for the respondents.
5. The further Case Management Preliminary Hearing to be held, in person, on
20 January 2023, was assigned to determine further procedure and list the
case for a substantive Hearing in March / May 2023. In advance of that further
25
Hearing, I ordered both parties to provide updated PH Agendas by set dates.
6. Subsequent correspondence ensued between both parties, and the Tribunal,
in the following period and, on 13 January 2023, the Tribunal wrote to both
parties, on my direction, to advise that I had ordered that the in person
(private, or closed) Case Management Preliminary Hearing to be held on 20
30
4103432/2022 Page 3
January 2023 had been converted to an in person open (i.e. public)
Preliminary Hearing on Strike Out of the claim, as sought by the respondents’
solicitor, Ms Rebeka Page, in her email to the Tribunal of 12 January 2023.
7. At this Preliminary Hearing, the case was listed to consider whether the claim
should be struck out under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of
5
Procedure 2013 on any or all of the 3 alternative grounds intimated by Ms
Page.
8. Given the alternative grounds of the respondents’ Strike Out application, I set
out below, in the following sections of these Reasons, the procedural history
of the claim and response to date of this Preliminary Hearing, including the
10
earlier case management of this claim before the Tribunal.
9. Only recently have I managed to complete my private deliberation in
chambers, and progress to issue of this my finalised Judgment, and for the
resultant delay, I again apologise to both parties, further to the written apology
previously issued by the Tribunal, on my behalf.
15
Claim and Response
10. The claim had been presented to the Tribunal by the claimant on 22 June
2022, following ACAS early conciliation between 23 May and 10 June 2022.
The claimant, who remained in the continuing employment of the
respondents, complained of discrimination on the grounds of disability, and
20
stated that he was owed “other payments”.
11. His ET1 claim form referred to an attached document for further detail, but it
was not received by the Tribunal, and his claim form did not state what remedy
he sought from the Tribunal.
12. His claim was accepted by the Tribunal administration, on 28 June 2022, and
25
served on the respondents on that date, requiring them to lodge a response
by 26 July 2022, and the case was listed for a telephone conference call Case
Management Preliminary Hearing to be held on 23 August 2022.
To continue reading
Request your trial