The Claimants brought various claims against the Respondents, including race discrimination, victimisation, harassment, and detriment as a result of having made a protected disclosure. At a hearing originally listed to determine certain preliminary jurisdictional issues, the ET decided instead to determine whether or not there had been compliance with an earlier Unless Order, and it determined that the Claimants had indeed failed to comply with that Order and so their claims were struck out. The Claimants appealed on seven grounds, including that the ET had erred in finding that there was material non-compliance by the Claimants with the Unless Order as to service of a Scott Schedule, and that the ET's decision was perverse in all the circumstances.

The EAT held that it was bound by the terms of the Unless Order, as was the ET. Even though it was an extremely draconian Unless Order, it could not be interfered with, and none of the grounds of appeal succeeded.