In this month’s update, we review some more cases on Unless Orders and strike-outs, as well as a case on discrimination arising from disability with a neurodiverse claimant, and a case on calculating losses where there has been a failure to mitigate. We also flag recent increases in a number of statutory rates.
We reported in last month’s update on an EAT decision finding that it was too punitive for a Tribunal to order that unless a Claimant provided further information about some of her claims, all of her claims would be struck out.
This month, we have seen a further two EAT decisions on similar issues:
In Rojha v Zinc Media Group, the EAT upheld a Tribunal’s decision to strike out all of the Claimant’s claims for a failure to comply with an Unless Order.
The Claimant had raised claims for discrimination on grounds of race, sex and pregnancy and maternity, along with claims for unfair dismissal, redundancy payment and other arrears of pay. The Claimant failed to attend a case management hearing, and the Tribunal ordered her to provide further information about her race discrimination...
Did you know that Caitlin Clark is an "avatar for people who want to spread hate"? Because Cari Champion does. Did you know that the fans who latched onto her are just middle Americans "who want t...