The Claimant was ordered to provide the court with a schedule of loss by a certain date which she failed to do. The Respondent applied for an unless order which was not complied with, one of the conditions being that the claimant was to write to the tribunal by return [emphasis by ET] confirming that the schedule of loss had now been provided. The claim was struck out. The Claimant appealed.

The EAT allowed the appeal on the following grounds:

The ET had;

• Failed to apply the overriding objective, having regard to the nature of the default when measured against the consequences to the appellant of striking out the claim;

• Failed to consider Rule 37(2) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, which provides: “A claim or response may not be struck out unless the party in question has been given a reasonable opportunity to make representations, either in writing or, if requested by the party, at a hearing”;

• Erred by interpreting the words “by return” in the Regional Employment Judge’s letter as meaning the next day; and

• Made a perverse decision on reconsideration by overlooking the fact that the schedule had been provided on the same day as the decision to strike out the claim.