Hylton v Royal Mail Group Ltd (Practice and Procedure) [2015] UKEAT 0369_14_2402 (24 February 2015)
The Judge did not err in law by refusing relief from strike-out; the Claimant failed to comply with orders, the medical evidence was unsatisfactory, and there was a real risk that a fair hearing could not proceed. The Judge considered all relevant circumstances and exercised discretion appropriately.
- Citation
- [2015] UKEAT 0369_14_2402
- Parties
- Appellant: Claimant; Respondent: Royal Mail
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 24 February 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Reinstate Claim After Strike Out
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Strike Out, Relief From Sanctions, Discrimination, Case Management, Proportionality
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Claimant
Appellant
Royal Mail
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Reinstate Claim After Strike Out
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in refusing relief from automatic strike-out following non-compliance with an unless order
- 2 Whether the Tribunal properly considered medical evidence and proportionality
- 3 Whether a fair trial remained possible
Ratio Decidendi
The Judge did not err in law by refusing relief from strike-out; the Claimant failed to comply with orders, the medical evidence was unsatisfactory, and there was a real risk that a fair hearing could not proceed. The Judge considered all relevant circumstances and exercised discretion appropriately.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- No relief from strike-out; claim remains struck out
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment