Silviu Stefan Stoica v Shamal Overseas Shoreditch Ltd — 2025

Silviu Stefan Stoica presented his claim form on 9 December 2024 and ticked unfair dismissal, sex discrimination (including equal pay), whistleblowing, and holiday pay. The judgment also records that the ET1 overview referred to disability discrimination and procedural irregularities, but the hearing before Employment Judge Woodhead on 3 October 2025 was a preliminary hearing for case management rather than a merits hearing.

The claimant did not attend the hearing listed for June 2025, so it was adjourned and he was warned that he was at serious risk of all claims being struck out if he did not attend the relisted hearing or provide a reasonable excuse. Before the 3 October 2025 hearing he emailed the tribunal saying that he would not attend, attaching material about his mother, an eviction, and caring responsibilities. The respondent objected to postponement and said the relevant documents had been sent to the claimant by email for months.

Employment Judge Woodhead considered the claimant’s email, the attached material, the video showing receipt of tribunal and respondent emails, and the clerk’s attempts to contact him on the day of the hearing. He found that the documents did not adequately explain why the claimant had failed to attend the June hearing, comply with EJ Tinnion’s order, or attend on 3 October 2025. The judge concluded that it was in the interests of justice to dismiss the claim under Rule 47 (Non-attendance). The judgment records no substantive findings on the underlying claims and no monetary award.