No attendance For the v Miss Mills solicitor — 2020

The tribunal was dealing with the claimant’s disability discrimination and unfair dismissal complaints, against a background of time limit issues. The chronology recorded by the judge included major episodes of depression in 2016 and 2017, dismissal for attendance on 8 October 2018, rejection of the appeal on 21 November 2018, ACAS early conciliation in March and April 2019, and presentation of the claim on 12 April 2019.

The hearing history showed repeated postponements sought by the claimant, including requests supported by fit notes and references to depression and caring responsibilities. For the final hearing on 14 January 2020, the claimant did not attend by 10am, did not respond to a telephone enquiry by the clerk, and there was no communication in the tribunal inbox or any medical evidence explaining the absence. Miss Mills for the respondent confirmed there had also been no response to her preparatory email.

The judge considered several procedural options, including adjourning, making an unless order, proceeding in the claimant’s absence, or dismissing the complaints under Rule 47. The tribunal noted that non-attendance wasted tribunal and party resources, that the alleged events were already some time old, and that it could not say which explanation for the absence was more likely. Exercising discretion under Rule 47, the judge dismissed the complaints because the claimant was not present or represented; the limitation issues were therefore not determined on their merits.