Mr D Rainsford v DXCG Ltd — 2020

On 7 January 2020 at Manchester, before Employment Judge Holmes, the tribunal was listed to hear Mr Rainsford's complaints of unlawful deductions from wages, notice pay, and a redundancy payment. The respondent had not responded and was not represented. The claimant also did not attend by the time the case was called on, and the tribunal clerk telephoned the mobile number on the claim form without success.

The tribunal referred to rule 47 of the Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, which allows dismissal where a party does not attend or is not represented after the tribunal has considered the available information and made any practicable enquiries. In light of the unexplained absence, the Employment Judge was not minded to dismiss the claims immediately and instead made an unless order requiring the claimant to explain in writing by 28 January 2020 why he had failed to attend or communicate with the tribunal.

The reasons state that, if the claimant complies, the tribunal will then consider whether to dismiss the claims under rule 47. The tribunal also noted that, if the claims are not dismissed, it may be able to deal with the matter without a further hearing and potentially grant a rule 21 judgment, but it would first need full details of gross and net pre-termination earnings, contractual notice terms, any sums still owed, and information about alternative work or benefits during the notice period.