The Claimant presented a claim form to the ET and at section 8 of the claim form she ticked the boxes which indicated that she was making complaints of age and sex discrimination (including equal pay). At section 9 of the form, she also ticked a box which indicated that she was complaining of unfair dismissal. She did not, however, have the requisite period of qualifying service to make such a complaint. The ET upheld an application made by the Respondents under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure to strike out the Claimant’s discrimination complaints on the basis that they had no reasonable prospect of success. The Claimant appealed.

The EAT allowed the appeal. The ET had (i) failed to recognise the extent of the Claimant’s pleaded case in terms of Cox v Adecco; (ii) wrongly concluded that the material facts about her discrimination complaints were not disputed and (iii) failed to take her complaints at their highest by making an informal assessment of likelihood of the Respondent’s evidence being preferred. These errors cumulatively led to its decision to strike out the discrimination complaints being wrong in law.