No attendance For the v Mr R McArdle (solicitor) — 2022

The hearing took place by telephone on 26 August 2021 before Employment Judge JM Wade. The claimant did not attend or become represented. The respondent attended through Mr R McArdle, solicitor. The judgment records that the claimant had presented his claim form on 20 June 2021 and that the respondent had already written asking him to clarify the breaches of contract he said justified resignation, but he did not reply.

At 10.05 the clerk telephoned the claimant. He said he had the letter and everything he needed to dial in, and that he would do so; he apologised for being late. The tribunal waited until 10.20, but he still had not joined. The tribunal considered the options of continuing in his absence, deciding the matter on the papers, making a deposit order, issuing an unless order or strike out warning, postponing, or dismissing the case under Rule 47.

The tribunal concluded that the claimant had had a reasonable opportunity to be heard because he had the hearing details in good time, had not applied for a postponement, and had been reminded that morning by the clerk. It also took into account the cost and prejudice to the respondent, the seriousness of the allegations, and the effect on other tribunal users. The tribunal noted that if some misfortune had prevented attendance, the claimant could challenge the decision with evidence. In the interests of justice, the complaints of unfair constructive dismissal (protective disclosure) and unlawful deductions from wages (sick pay) were dismissed.