Ministry of Justice

Case Summary

The employment tribunal struck out the claimant's age discrimination and gender reassignment discrimination claims, dismissed the former on withdrawal. The unfair dismissal, breach of contract, holiday pay, and wages claims were not struck out and will proceed to a hearing.

The tribunal struck out the age discrimination and gender reassignment discrimination claims, though the specific procedural reason for striking out is not detailed in the summary provided. The unfair dismissal and other claims proceeded to hearing.

• •age_discrimination
• •gender_reassignment_discrimination
• •unfair_dismissal
• •breach_of_contract
• •holiday_pay
• •wages

Case No: 2200598/2024 1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS SITTING AT: LONDON CENTRAL BEFORE: EMPLOYMENT JUDGE F SPENCER BY CVP CLAIMANT MS J WILLIAMS RESPONDENT MINISTRY OF JUSTICE ON: 21 NOVEMBER 2024 Appearances: For the Claimant: In person For the Respondent: Ms C Jennings, counsel JUDGMENT The Judgment of the Tribunal is that: (i) The Claimant’s claim of age discrimination is struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. (ii) The Claimant’s claim of gender reassignment discrimination is dismissed on withdrawal. (iii) The Claimant’s claims of unfair dismissal, breach of contract, holiday pay and wages are not struck out and will proceed to a hearing, subject to compliance with the unless order made today. REASONS 1. The purpose of today’s preliminary hearing was to consider the Respondent’s application dated 20 June 2024. Case No: 2200598/2024 2 a. “To strike out the Claimant’s age discrimination claim on the grounds that it has no reasonable prospect of success or, in the alternative, to make a deposit order as a condition of continuing her claim on the grounds that it has little reasonable prospect of success; and b. To strike out the gender reassignment discrimination claim, holiday pay, notice pay, and other payments claims on the grounds of the Claimant’s failure to comply with the Tribunal’s order of 29 th April 2024. 2. The Claimant had difficulty joining the hearing by video and, after some delay, joined by telephone so that she could be heard but not seen. No objection was taken to this course of action for the Respondent. 3. The provisions for strike out are set out in Rule 37 of Schedule 1 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, which provides that a Tribu…