Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

This is a rather unusual case, made unusual by the fact that a Pre Hearing Review (“PHR”) which was initially scheduled for half a day had not concluded133 days after the claim was struck out by the Employment Judge.

The facts in Osonnaya v South West Essex Primary Care Trust

Dr Osonnaya (“the Claimant”) submitted complaints to the Employment Tribunal on 4 September 2007 relating to unfair dismissal for making a public-interest disclosure (“automatic unfair dismissal”), disability discrimination, and race discrimination.  Preliminary issues of whether the Claimant was an employee or a worker for the purposes of the law relating to unfair dismissal and disability and race discrimination. A Pre Hearing Review was therefore scheduled for 14 April 2008 to deal with these issues.

The claim for disability discrimination related in whole or in part to a serious illness that the Claimant has (“sarcoidosis”). This illness is an auto-immune illness and has serious effects on the Claimant – she is almost blind and is wheelchair-bound. As the Claimant was dependent on her carer to attend the Employment Tribunal she was often late for the 10.30am start. She also required injections during the day and lost her voice. Further, the Claimant struggled to obtain consistent representation. However, as the Hearing days passed the Employment Judge took the view that a fair hearing would no longer be possible because it couldn’t be predicted when the hearing would finish. The Judge therefore decided of his own volition to consider whether proceedings should be struck out on the basis that it was no longer possible to have a fair hearing. He considered that there was no evidence to suggest that there would be an end to the case, the Respondent was being prejudiced because of the costs of the case, and that potential problems with a witness in Tazmania would further delay the administration of justice. He therefore struck the claim out.

The Claimant appealed.

The law relating to the Employment Tribunal’s power to strike out claims

The Employment Tribunal has the power to strike out a claim (or a response) under Rule 18(7) of the Tribunal Rules in the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004. Under Rule 18(7) a claim (or a response) may be struck out if:

  • The claim or response is scandalous or vexatious
  • The claim or response has no reasonable prospect of success
  • Proceedings have been conducted by or on behalf of a party in a scandalous, unreasonable or vexatious manner
  • The claim has not been actively pursued
  • There has been non-compliance with an order or practice direction; and/or
  • It is no longer possible to have a fair full hearing (Rule 18(7)(f)

Rule 18(7)(f) (the possibility of a fair hearing) normally arises in cases where medical incapacity has rendered a Claimant unable to pursue his or her case effectively (as in Peixoto v British Telecommunications PLC). However, rulings under Rule 18(7)(f) are extremely rare in practice.

This power generally only arises at Pre Hearing Reviews. However, there is one exception – if an “unless order” has been issued and a party has failed to comply with the “unless order”. In those circumstances the claim can be struck out with a Pre Hearing Review being attended.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal’s judgment in Osonnaya v South West Essex Primary Care Trust

The Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld the Claimant’s appeal. A sufficient amount of time had not passed such as to absolutely prejudice the possibility of a full fair hearing and the Employment Appeal Tribunal believed that the Judge’s case for striking out the claim was overstated. What he should have done instead was to exercise his case management powers to marshal the parties and bring the case to a conclusion within a reasonable time. Further, the financial prejudice to the Respondent had to be weighed against the possibility of a fair trial, and the necessity of a fair trial generally outweighed any financial prejudice (although consideration had to be had to the financial circumstances of the Respondent). Further, the Judge had made a medical judgment relating to the Claimant’s capacity to continue the hearing, a judgment he was not entitled to make.

Our specialist employment lawyers’ thoughts on Osonnaya v South West Essex Primary Care Trust

This is a purely procedural case but one which raises important and interesting issues relating to the Employment Tribunal’s power to manage and strike out claims. Employment Judges clearly have the right to exercise the power to strike out claims under Rule 18(7) but in doing so must obtain sufficient evidence to make a reasoned decision. Further, the Judge must not make decision that he is not entitled to (such as on medical evidence).

About Chris Hadrill

Chris is a specialist employment lawyer at Redmans. He specialises in contentious and non-contentious employment matters, including breach of contract claims, compromise agreements and Employment Tribunal cases. He writes on employment law matters on a variety of websites, including Direct 2 Lawyers, Lawontheweb.co.uk, LegalVoice, the Justice Gap and his own blog.

Contact Chris by emailing him at chadrill@redmans.co.uk

Share →

Our awards

Request a callback

Your name

Your email

Your telephone number

Contact us

Please feel free to discuss your own position and concerns. Contact your nearest office on:

T: 020 3397 3603
E: enquiries@redmans.co.uk
W: www.redmans.co.uk

Testimonials

4.52 Average

21 Reviews

Redman's provided excellent legal employment advice for me during a difficult time in my employment. Chris was my lawyer, super efficient, quick, reliable and clearly very experienced in the matter. Could not ask for a better law firm to deal with your query if you are in need of some help. Would definitely use them again in the future. Highly recommending Chris.

Posted 1 month ago

Steven

Chris Hadrill was very professional and responsive. I would highly recommend him

Posted 1 month ago

Dinah

Very Efficient, with very quick email reply’s. I had a matter that needed resolving within a very short space of time and Redmans Solicitors were great with dealing with my matter quickly.

Posted 1 month ago

Ankar

At Redmans the solicitor that was dealing with me was Chris. He dealt with my situation smoothly with clear guidance and explanation

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Clear, concise advice and guidance delivered by an experienced and very capable solicitor, within the timelines required

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Very efficient service. I never had to wIt for more than a day for a reply to any of my queries and the matter was dealt with swiftly.

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Very timely, thorough and helpful advice. Friendly and considerate of the needs of the client

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Very prompt and attention to detail. Thank you for the service

Posted 2 months ago

Chris

Couldn’t be happier with how Redmans successfully handled our seemingly tricky case. By being clear and detailed every step of the way, with the utmost professionalism and courtesy, they made it an informative and eye-opening process, taking the stress out of the situation and ultimately delivered what you would want from such a service. I fully appreciate everything they have done, and if I am ever in need of such services in the future, they will be the first number I contact. Excellent.

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Excellent work delivered with great quality

Posted 2 months ago

Dominic

Chris Hadrill was a great help both in terms of his advice and his expertise. He explained my options to me clearly and concisely enabling me to quickly make the right decision for me in the circumstance. I would not hesitate to recommend Chris or Redmans to friends or colleagues, and would certainly make Redmans my first port of call should I require a similar service in the future.

Posted 2 months ago

Kurt

Redmans gave excellent advice and helped me understand everything in clear concepts. Thank you!

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Resolved my issues

Posted 2 months ago

Keith

Quick fast professional service.

Posted 2 months ago

Michael

"Prompt, efficient and practical advice that resulted in me getting some additional money tax free."

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Patient and thorough advice given to me around my Settlement Agreement

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

"Excellent service, getting back to you promptly giving you very good advice."

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

I found Chris Hadrill to be an excellent help, he is very knowledgeable and gives good ,concise ,strategic advice .He makes himself readily accessible when you need him.I would personally highly recommend him.

Posted 2 months ago

Christine

Professional, efficient and reliable service provided. I strongly recommend them and I would use this service again.

Posted 2 months ago