The claimant’s claims were struck out for unreasonable conduct, alternatively on the basis they had not been actively pursued. The claimant had mental and physical impairments. He had previously made an application for reasonable adjustments and some months later wrote to the Tribunal informing the Tribunal of his non-availability for the following six months, which period encompassed the dates listed for the full merits hearing. The reasons included health reasons but also included his son’s wedding, planned travel for further wedding ceremonies, a visit from his sister and a visit from a friend. The claimant did not attend several hearings at which those applications would have been discussed and did not explain his non-attendance at the hearings.

In this appeal, the claimant contended primarily that the EJ erred in law in failing to address his previous applications for reasonable adjustments before striking out his claims and that this failure materially affected the EJ’s assessment of his culpability in relation to non-compliance with orders and her prediction of his future conduct for the purposes of identifying whether there was a measure short of strike out which would have made a fair trial possible. HHJ Joffe dismissed the appeal as the ET had not erred in not determining the application for reasonable adjustments before considering strike out. The EJ had appropriately considered the claimant’s disability on the basis of the available evidence when assessing whether strike out was appropriate.