The Claimant presented an ET1 claiming unpaid wages and failure to provide a payslip and P45, but also indicated that further claims might be added after taking advice. A supplementary document referred to disability, bullying, and grievances. The ET issued a Rule 21 judgment on paper for wages only, without considering the Claimant’s indication of further claims or her email stating she had prepared a witness statement and bundle for the listed hearing. The Claimant appealed

The EAT allowed the appeal. Under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013, a judge may issue a paper judgment only if satisfied that the claim can properly be determined on the available material; otherwise, a hearing must be listed. see Limoine v Sharma [2020] ICR 389. The case law emphasises that summary disposal is inappropriate where claims are unclear and that reasonable assistance should be given to litigants in person. On the material before the Tribunal – including the ET1, supplementary document, and Claimant’s email – the scope of the claim was unclear and potentially wider than wages. The judge should have sought clarification before issuing judgment. Failure to do so fell outside the reasonable exercise of discretion. The case was remitted to the ET under current Rule 22 for reconsideration by any judge.