No attendance v Respondent — 2021

The claimant’s claim form of 6 October 2020 brought claims of constructive unfair dismissal, arrears of pay and notice pay against DHL International (U.K.) Limited. The final hearing was listed to start on 6 May 2021 by CVP at Leeds, before Employment Judge Wedderspoon, and the claimant did not attend.

At the start of the hearing the claimant had sent an email to the tribunal, but it was not copied to the respondent. The tribunal arranged for the email to be forwarded to the respondent and took steps to contact the claimant by email because she had not provided telephone details. She did not respond before the hearing resumed. The respondent applied for dismissal under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules, or alternatively strike out under rule 37 or an unless order.

The tribunal recorded that the claimant knew of the final hearing date from the preliminary hearing on 16 December 2020, had not applied within the permitted 7 days to vacate it, and had later sought an adjournment on 15 April 2021, which was refused by order dated 19 April 2021. The tribunal also noted an earlier order requiring English translations of Polish recordings by 26 April 2021, and found that order proper and reasonable. It concluded that the claimant had chosen not to participate in the final hearing and that her allegations of collusion and other impropriety were unsupported by evidence.

Applying rule 47 and the overriding objective, the tribunal decided that dismissal was proportionate because the claimant had deliberately not engaged, the hearing had been listed for nearly six months, and the respondent’s witnesses and legal team had attended. It considered but did not need to make an order under rule 37(1)(d), and it held that an unless order would not be proportionate. All claims were dismissed for non-attendance; no merits findings or monetary remedy were made.