No appearance v Ms Blythe , Solicitor — 2020

At the open preliminary hearing the claimant did not appear. The tribunal checked that he knew about the hearing, recorded that the wrong CVP link had been sent, and later confirmed the decision on reconsideration under Rule 70 because the respondent had attended, the claimant still had time to join, and the prejudice to the respondent in delaying outweighed any prejudice to the claimant.

Applying the strike-out principles it cited, including Rule 37, Van Rensburg, Tayside Public Transport, Ezsias, Chandhok, Madarassy, Khan, Shamoon and JFS, the tribunal struck out the race discrimination claim and the TUPE-related automatic unfair dismissal claim. It said the race pleading contained no facts linking the complaint to the claimant's Eritrean descent, and no pleaded basis for saying the dismissal, said to be for capability after long-term absence, was connected to a relevant transfer some 13 years earlier.

It refused the respondent's strike-out and deposit application on the wrongful dismissal/breach of contract claim, which sought an extra four weeks' paid notice under a long-term absence policy. The tribunal noted that the policy's contractual status and TUPE effect were unclear because of limited documentation, that the claim was limited to the extra notice period, and that the unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal/breach of contract claims would continue to the full hearing. The judgment also recorded that the claimant's disability remained disputed and that any disability-related issues would be dealt with later.