Did not attend For the v Mr K Chehal, Consultant — 2022

The claimant, Mr I Conteh, was employed by the respondent as a Security Guard. He presented a claim on 7 February 2022 after early conciliation, describing the matter as unpaid wages, but the claim form did not say when the wages were due or how much was claimed. The respondent asked for further particulars after lodging its response.

The claimant emailed the tribunal on 29 March 2022 with more precise details of the claim, but he did not copy that email to the respondent. The respondent then applied for a postponement, and the tribunal wrote to the claimant on 1 April 2022 seeking his comments. He did not reply. On 11 April 2022 the tribunal chased a response and warned that failure to reply could lead to strike out, but the claimant again did not respond.

The respondent also applied on 11 April 2022 for the claim to be struck out for failure actively to pursue it. The claimant was sent joining instructions on 13 April 2022 and told that the respondent's application would be considered at the hearing, but he did not attend the hearing on 14 April 2022. Taking those failures together, Employment Judge E Burns granted the respondent's application and struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) on the ground that it had not been actively pursued. The judgment notes that if the claimant has a good reason for not responding or attending, he may apply to have the judgment revoked under rule 70 within 14 days of it being sent to the parties.