Mr A Tarczynski v Tremorfa Property Limited — 2019

Mr A Tarczynski did not attend the hearing on 28 November 2019. Tribunal staff attempted to contact him, but there was no answer on his telephone and no facility to leave a message. The Tribunal also noted that he had not responded to earlier correspondence, including a letter of 15 August 2019 asking whether he objected to the respondent's change of name and requiring him to set out what sums he was seeking and how he calculated them, and an email of 18 November 2019 about whether he objected to the respondent amending its grounds of resistance.

In those circumstances, Employment Judge Harfield dismissed the claim under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure. The written record does not determine the substantive merits of the underlying complaint. It records only that the case was dismissed because the claimant failed to attend and did not engage with the Tribunal's directions or correspondence.

No remedy was awarded and no findings were made on liability, loss, or any monetary calculation. The judgment was given orally at the hearing, with written reasons not provided unless requested in accordance with the note at the end of the decision.