This case concerned the way in which the ET dealt with the Claimant's disability discrimination claims. She had requested that the hearing be postponed due to her and her husband being too ill to attend. The request was refused and her claim was struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. A costs order was also made against her. She appealed.

The EAT dismissed the appeal. After a lengthy analysis of the caselaw relating to case management decisions, the EAT rejected the proposition that they should themselves re-make the decisions under appeal, the ET had not erred in law in refusing the request for an adjournment, they could not see any factual basis for the contention that the ET considered without prejudice save as to costs correspondence before he came to the issue of costs and finally the costs order was not erroneous in law.