Fariba v Pfizer Ltd & Ors (Practice and Procedure : Striking-out or dismissal) [2011] UKEAT 0605_10_1407 (14 July 2011)

Fariba v Pfizer Ltd & Ors (Practice and Procedure : Striking-out or dismissal) [2011] UKEAT 0605_10_1407 (14 July 2011)

The Appellant persistently failed to comply with Tribunal orders to particularise her claims and provide disclosure, gave no reasonable excuse, and demonstrated by her conduct—including repeated unfounded allegations against the Respondents, their solicitors, and the Tribunal—that she was incapable of bringing her complaints to a fair and orderly trial. The Employment Judge was entitled to strike out the claims under rule 18(7)(c) and (e) and to order costs against the Appellant.

Citation
[2011] UKEAT 0605_10_1407
Parties
Appellant: Dr Fariba; Respondents: Pfizer Ltd and three individual managers
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
14 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Strike Out and Costs Order After Pre Hearing Review
Outcome
Appeal dismissed. Strike out and costs order upheld.
Legal Topics
Strike Out of Claims, Case Management, Disability Discrimination, Race Discrimination, Whistleblowing, Costs Orders
Employment Law Civil Procedure Strike Out of Claims Case Management Disability Discrimination Race Discrimination Whistleblowing Costs Orders

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Fariba

Appellant

Pfizer Ltd and three individual managers

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Strike Out and Costs Order After Pre Hearing Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Judge was entitled to strike out the claimant's claims for non-compliance with tribunal orders and unreasonable conduct
  2. 2 Whether the claimant's conduct justified a costs order against her

Ratio Decidendi

The Appellant persistently failed to comply with Tribunal orders to particularise her claims and provide disclosure, gave no reasonable excuse, and demonstrated by her conduct—including repeated unfounded allegations against the Respondents, their solicitors, and the Tribunal—that she was incapable of bringing her complaints to a fair and orderly trial. The Employment Judge was entitled to strike out the claims under rule 18(7)(c) and (e) and to order costs against the Appellant.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed. Strike out and costs order upheld.

Orders

  • The Appellant's claims remain struck out.
  • The Appellant is to pay the entirety of the Respondents' costs of the proceedings, to be assessed in the County Court.