The claimant had been employed by the first respondent from 1993 until 2021 when his employment was terminated after which he brought claims of constructive unfair dismissal, race and disability discrimination. Deposit orders made in May 2023 were not paid so the clams were struck out. At a January 2024 preliminary hearing, applications for postponement and relief from sanctions were refused so the claimant lodged an appeal. Two grounds survived the permission stage: that the tribunal erred in refusing relief from sanctions, and that apparent bias against the claimant's representative rendered the hearing unfair.

Judge Stout dismissed the appeal as on ground one, once the postponement application failed, there was no evidential basis to pursue sanctions relief. On ground two, following Porter v Magill, bias was not established as the various assertions of that purported to show bias were unremarkable and, read as a whole, the written reasons disclosed no real possibility of an unfair hearing.