Case 2306054/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 2306054/2020
- Decision date
- 9 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kumar Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal listed the case for a 5-day liability hearing on the claimant's complaint of unfair dismissal. The claimant did not attend, no prior notice or explanation was received, and the tribunal made attempts to contact him by telephone and email before starting the hearing. The hearing start was delayed until 12.30pm to allow further time for a response, but none was received. None of the claimant's four witnesses attended either.
The tribunal referred to rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 and considered the available information before deciding how to proceed in the claimant's absence. It noted that the claimant had also failed, without notice or explanation, to attend a case management hearing on 12 December 2022 and had not complied with the directions made on that occasion. The respondent's counsel also told the tribunal that the claimant had not responded to recent correspondence.
The tribunal was satisfied that the claimant had received proper notice of the hearing and the case management orders. On the information available, it concluded that the claimant was not actively pursuing his claim and that it was unable to determine the claim in his absence. The unfair dismissal claim was therefore dismissed under rule 47.
The respondent applied for the claimant to pay its costs. The tribunal noted a costs schedule showing costs of £17,589.60 from 1 November 2022 to date, but adjourned the application so that the claimant could make written representations by 4pm on 27 January 2023 and provide documentary evidence of his ability to pay if he wished to oppose a costs order.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claimant's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 after he failed to attend the 5-day hearing, gave no prior notice or explanation, and did not respond to the tribunal's attempts to contact him by telephone and email. The tribunal was satisfied that he had received proper notice of the hearing and case management orders, noted his earlier unexplained non-attendance at the 12 December 2022 case management hearing and non-compliance with those directions, and recorded that none of his four witnesses attended. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.