Not present or represented For the v Ms R Bennett-Odlum, solicitor — 2023

The hearing on 9 March 2023 was listed as a case management preliminary hearing by video. The claimant did not join at the scheduled start time. The tribunal had already changed the start time, sent the CVP joining instructions by email, and then telephoned the claimant when she still had not appeared.

When contacted at 14:20, the claimant answered the phone but hung up after being asked to join the hearing. The clerk then called again, emailed a warning that the hearing would proceed in her absence if she did not join by 14:30, and left the same message on voicemail. The tribunal also recorded that the claimant had said she did not have the link, and the joining instructions were resent, but she still did not join.

The respondent submitted that the claimant had not been actively pursuing the claim and had not responded to requests to clarify her complaints or comment on the draft list of issues and hearing agenda. The tribunal agreed that the claim was very unclear and that, without the claimant or any written representations, it was not possible to clarify the issues or give case management directions to progress the case.

The judge decided not to proceed in the claimant's absence and, applying Rule 47 and the overriding objective, dismissed the claim for non-attendance. The judgment also records that Staff Management Limited was joined as a second respondent under Rule 34, and that the claim was dismissed against both respondents. No substantive liability findings or monetary award were made.