Ms M Moloney v London Borough of Brent: 3347026/2016
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Case No 3347026/2016
Between
Ms M MoloneyClaimantLondon Borough of BrentRespondent
Before
Employment Judge SmailNot in attendance for claimantMs R White (instructed by counsel) for respondentDate 30 June 2021
JUDGMENT
ON APPLICATION FOR RECONSIDERATION There are no reasonable prospects that the case management orders made at the Preliminary Hearings on 29 May 2018 and 30 August 2018 will be revoked or varied. Therefore, there will be no reconsideration of them.
REASONS
[1]The Claimant has sent in numerous pieces of correspondence seeking alterations to the record of the preliminary hearings. She has disclosed no basis for altering the orders made.[2]I made sets of orders facilitating the Claimant to prosecute her claim. She has not complied with orders and has therefore not prosecuted her claim. She has struggled to articulate her claims which has made it very difficult to deal with her case. I see from his record of proceedings that Employment Judge Henry found the same on 11 September 2018. The issues I identified were my best effort at understanding her case. I indicated what she needed to do further to clarify it.[3]The Claimant is right that on 29 May 2018, the figure £9,786 was mentioned. That is the calculation of a redundancy payment/basic award if she is entitled to it.[4]The Claimant is right that I asked her about being Irish. That is because she was intimating a race claim. Directions for amending her claim to add race discrimination were given, which she did not comply with.[5]It is right that there might have been a judicial assessment conducted by me on 30 August 2018. However, I recused myself because the Claimant had a very Case Number: 3347026/2016 2 different recollection of events on 29 May 2018 than I had, which became clear on 30 August 2018. I recused myself because I was being drawn into evidential conflict with her. I ordered that another Judge conduct the Judicial Assessment. He found he could not do so because he could not follow the Claimant’s case. That actually is a Judicial Assessment when you think about it.[6]The case management orders I made were relevant and proportionate. There is no prospect that I would change them. I regard it as a pity that the Claimant has not followed them. __________________________ Employment Judge Smail 17.12.18 Sent to the parties on: …17.12.18.………………. For the Tribunal: …………………………….. Case No. 3347026/16 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant v Respondent Ms M Moloney London Borough of Brent Held at: Watford On: 19 December 2018 Employment Judge Manley Appearances For the claimant: Not in attendance For the respondent: Ms R White, counsel[1]The hearing listed for today and the following two days is postponed at the claimant’s request in the light of the comments made by her GP in a statement of fitness for work certificate.[2]The hearing is now listed for two days before an employment judge on Thursday 8 and Friday 9 August 2019 to start at 10am or as soon as possible at Watford Employment Tribunal, Radius House, Clarendon Road, Watford, WD17 1HP. The respondent will call one witness and bundle of documents has already been prepared.[3]In order to ensure that the case can proceed, I made the order set out below with respect to the claimant’s health. I also made an unless order for the claimant’s witness statement to be sent to the tribunal and the respondent as the order for it made many months ago has not been complied with. ORDERS Made pursuant to the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013 and by consent[1]The claimant will ask her GP to prepare a more detailed report on her health. That report should set out whether the claimant is well enough to Case No.3347026/16 2 make the necessary preparations for and attend the hearing of her claim. If the claimant is not well enough, the GP should indicate when and whether she will be and their opinion on the claimant being able to continue to prosecute this claim. This report should be sent to the tribunal by 29 March 2019.[2]The respondent should send its witness statement to the claimant within 7 days of receiving the claimant’s witness statement. CONSEQUENCES OF NON-COMPLIANCE[1]Failure to comply with an order for disclosure may result on summary conviction in a fine of up to £1,000 being imposed upon a person in default under section 7(4) of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996.[2]The tribunal may also make a further order providing that unless it is complied with, the claim or, as the case may be, the response shall be struck out on the date of non-compliance without further consideration of the proceedings or the need to give notice or hold a preliminary hearing or a hearing.[3]An order may be varied or revoked upon application by a person affected by the order or by a judge on his/her own initiative. _____________________________ Employment Judge Manley, Watford _20.12.18____________________[1]The claimant’s claims for breach of contract and constructive unfair dismissal contrary to the Employment Rights Act 1996 are unsuccessful and dismissed.[2]The claimant’s claim for accrued but unpaid holiday pay was withdrawn by the claimant and is dismissed.