Miss O Henderson v Rocco Johnson — 2022

The claim was presented on 20 August 2021 and originally included unfair dismissal and unpaid wages. The tribunal noted that the unfair dismissal claim had already been struck out by Employment Judge Woffenden on 7 December 2021 after the claimant did not reply to a letter inviting representations, and that the judge had recorded that her period of employment was under two years.

The remaining claim for unpaid wages was listed for a three-hour hearing on 28 July 2022. By that date the claimant had not attended, had not responded to further tribunal correspondence, had not complied with directions to provide a schedule of loss and statements of evidence, and had not replied when asked to confirm the respondent's name. The tribunal also noted that the ET1 gave only a general description of the claim, referring to working an average of 92 hours, and did not state the rate of pay.

The hearing went ahead in the claimant's and respondent's absence. The judge kept the CVP rooms open until 10:30, asked the clerk to telephone the claimant, and received no answer. Applying rule 47 and taking account of the limited information before the tribunal, the judge concluded that the claimant had had sufficient notice, that practicable enquiries had been made about her absence, and that dismissal was appropriate in the circumstances. The claim was therefore dismissed and no remedy was awarded.