No attendance For the v Ms A Skeoch (solicitor) — 2021

The claimant, a former flexible warehouse operative, presented a claim form on 12 May 2021. The tribunal recorded that the claim form was unclear, but that four claims could be discerned in outline: failure to pay holiday pay, race discrimination, victimisation, and whistleblowing detriment. An Employment Judge ordered further information to be provided by 30 July 2021, but none was supplied, and there had been no contact from the claimant since 18 May 2021.

The hearing on 1 September 2021 was held by telephone before Employment Judge JM Wade. The claimant did not attend, nor was he represented. The respondent attended through Ms A Skeoch, solicitor. The tribunal attempted to contact the claimant by telephone and email, but he did not answer and no explanation for his absence was received by the time the hearing terminated at about 10.37am.

Having considered the available options, including proceeding in absence, postponement, an unless order, strike out warning, or dismissal, the judge concluded that dismissal was in the interests of justice under Rule 47. The tribunal took into account that the claimant had been given the hearing details in good time, had the opportunity to seek a postponement, and had been reminded on the morning of the hearing. It also considered the cost to the respondent and the tribunal, the need to use tribunal resources fairly, and the fact that the allegations, including health and safety and race discrimination matters, were serious and carried stigma.

The judgment dismissed the claimant's claims of failure to pay holiday pay, race discrimination, victimisation, and whistleblowing detriment. The tribunal noted that if misfortune had prevented attendance, the claimant could challenge the decision by providing evidence of what intervened to prevent attendance or by showing that he had sought a postponement. No remedy was awarded.