Donna Edinboro v Jamma Umoja (Residential Services) Ltd
[2024] EAT 61
Wangtian Xie v E'Quipe Japan Ltd
14 November 2024
[2024] EAT 176
Employment Appeal Tribunal
A worker claimed their boss discriminated against them because of their race. The first court threw out the case without a full hearing. A higher court said the first court made a mistake and should have properly considered all the worker's claims before dismissing the case. The case will now be heard again by a different judge.
Key Facts
- •Miss Wangtian Xie (Appellant) brought a race discrimination claim against E'quipe Japan Ltd (Respondent).
- •The Employment Tribunal struck out the claim due to no reasonable prospect of success.
- •The Appellant is a litigant in person.
- •The claim alleged direct race discrimination by the Respondent's trainer and Area Manager.
- •The Appellant alleged an 'anti-Chinese culture' within the company.
- •The Employment Tribunal considered the Appellant's case at its highest but found no reasonable prospect of success.
- •The Appellant appealed the strike-out decision.
Legal Principles
Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013 allows for strike-out of claims with no reasonable prospect of success.
Employment Tribunal Rules 2013, Rule 37
Strike-out is a draconian step, only used in clear-cut cases. There is a public interest in discrimination cases being heard on their merits.
Various case law, summarised in judgment
Care should be taken when striking out claims from litigants in person. However, it's not prohibited, particularly if the claim contradicts undisputed evidence.
Various case law, summarised in judgment
Strike-out is generally inappropriate where there's a core of disputed fact. The claimant's case should be taken at its highest.
Various case law including Ezsias v North Glamorgan NHS Trust and Romanowska v Aspirations Care Ltd
A core of disputed fact includes the reason for a decision, particularly in discrimination claims relating to mental processes of the decision-maker.
Ezsias v North Glamorgan NHS Trust and Zeb v Xerox (UK) Ltd
Taking a case at its highest requires assuming the claimant will establish the primary facts, not that the inference of discrimination will be proven.
Romanowska v Aspirations Care Ltd and Mechkarov v Citibank NA
Strike-out is not prohibited in discrimination cases with disputed facts, but it's a limited exception. The hurdle for strike-out is high, especially in discrimination cases.
Ahir v. British Airways Plc and Anyanwu v South Bank Students Union
Outcomes
The appeal was allowed.
The Employment Tribunal erred in law by striking out the claim. It failed to properly apply the legal principles regarding core disputed facts and taking the claimant's case at its highest. The Tribunal improperly conflated these principles. The judge also mischaracterised an element of the claimant's case (the tea break incident).
The strike-out was set aside.
The case was remitted to a different Employment Tribunal for rehearing.