Ms K Naureen v Harrods Ltd. — 2025

The tribunal had listed the case for a three-day final hearing on 10 March 2025. On the morning of the hearing it converted the hearing from in person to CVP and notified the parties, with the hearing due to start at 2 pm. Neither the claimant nor her representative attended, and the tribunal clerk's attempts to contact them by email and telephone received no response.

The tribunal considered the claimant's earlier request to proceed by written representations because of health issues, together with the GP note and hospital letter she had provided. It found that the medical evidence supported, at most, an inability to attend in person and did not explain why she could not attend by video or telephone. The tribunal also noted that no promised written representations had been submitted and that the representative, who had said he could attend in person if required, also failed to appear without explanation.

Applying Rule 47, the tribunal decided it was appropriate to proceed in the claimant's absence and not to adjourn. It found that reasonable enquiries had been made, that the claimant had been offered a remote hearing, and that the available medical material did not justify total non-attendance. Because the burden of proof lay on the claimant, disability was disputed, and her witness statement had not been tested in cross-examination, the tribunal concluded there was insufficient evidence to establish either claim and dismissed both claims.