Mrs S Khan v The MFG Academies Trust and Others: 1803696/2021
JUDGMENT
[1]The Claimant did not meet the definition of a disabled person at the material time.[2]The claims of harassment related to disability and failure to meet the duty to make adjustments fail and are dismissed. Employment Judge Cox Date: 20 January 2022 Judgment sent to the parties on: Date: 26 January 2022 Note: Reasons for this Judgment having been given at the Preliminary Hearing, written reasons will be provided only if requested in writing by a party within 14 days of this written record of the decision being sent to the parties. Case Number: 1803696/2021 1 of 2 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mrs S Khan Respondent: The MFG Academies Trust Heard by CVP on 18 March 2022 Before: Employment Judge D N Jones Appearances For the claimant: Not in attendance For the respondent: Miss L Quigley, counselREASONS
[1]This case was listed to finalise the legal complaints and to consider applications for strike out and /or deposit orders.[2]At a preliminary hearing on 20 January 2022 Employment Judge Cox had dismissed the disability discrimination complaints having found that the claimant was not a disabled person at the material time. She made an Order with respect to the remaining complaints which she had discerned from the documents before the Tribunal and a discussion in the remaining time available. The legal complaints were contained in an Annex to the Order[3]The claimant was ordered to provide further information by 1 March 2022 about missing details in respect of the legal claims and to express whether there were any further complaints in the claim form which had not been included in the Annex.[4]The claimant submitted a complaint and request for reconsideration and/or revocation of Orders by letter of 31 January 2022. She did not provide the further information ordered. She was required to clarify the nature of her application, by letter Case Number: 1803696/2021 2 of 2 of 9 February 2022. That letter stated that the remaining orders remained in place and had to be complied with.[5]On 9 March 2022 the representatives of the respondent made an application to strike out the claims, or some of them, on the ground the claimant had failed to comply with the orders and failed actively to pursue her claim.[6]The claimant did not attend. The Tribunal has had no communication from her since 31 January 2022. She has disengaged from prosecuting her claim. A fair hearing of the claims is not possible in these circumstances.