The Claimant’s claims were struck out under Rule 37 ET Rules 2013 due to the conduct of her representative and the ET’s conclusion that a fair trial was not possible as that conduct was thought not likely to change. The Claimant appealed on several grounds, including that she had not been given reasonable notice of the strike out application.

The EAT allowed the appeal. The procedure adopted was fundamentally unfair on the Claimant in that neither she nor her representative had been given reasonable notice of the application to strike out her claims. Having concluded that the Claimant’s representative was ‘on a crusade’ and not acting in his client’s best interest, it was not fair to then immediately proceed to strike out her claims on that basis.