No appearance or v Respondent — 2020

The claim, issued on 18 May 2019, came before Employment Judge Truscott QC at a remote preliminary hearing on 20 November 2020. The respondent applied to strike out the case under Rule 37(1)(b), (c) and (d). The claimant did not participate in the hearing. The tribunal recorded a series of case management orders after the 22 June 2020 hearing, including directions for a witness statement, skeleton argument, schedule of loss, disclosure, and exchange of witness evidence, and noted that those orders had not been complied with.

Applying Rule 37 and the authorities it cited, including Blockbuster Entertainment Ltd v James, Bennett v London Borough of Southwark, Bolch v Chipman, Rolls Royce plc v Riddle and Birkett v James, the tribunal found that the claimant had engaged in unreasonable conduct, had not complied with tribunal orders, and had not actively pursued the claim. It held that, without the claimant's participation, a fair trial was not possible, and that striking out the claim was proportionate under the overriding objective. The hearing fixed for 17 to 20 May 2021 was discharged.

The tribunal also noted the respondent's earlier application concerning direct race and sex discrimination. It observed that, on the dates supplied by the claimant, those complaints appeared to be out of time, there was no asserted continuing act, dismissal was not said to be an act of discrimination, and no material had been provided to support a just and equitable extension of time. The tribunal said that application would likely have been granted, but the final order in this judgment was that the whole claim be struck out.