MR G I EKWENUGO v Bombardier Transportation UK Limited — 2021

These reasons concern a procedural dismissal under rule 47 rather than a merits determination of the underlying claims. On the third day of the hearing, after the tribunal had refused the claimant's postponement application, it directed that the hearing recommence at 2.00pm on 27 October 2021 to hear evidence from the claimant. He did not attend. The respondent applied for dismissal, and the tribunal unanimously dismissed the claim.

The tribunal found that the claimant had deliberately chosen not to attend and that there was no good medical reason for his absence. It relied on the timing of his detailed email, which was written between the refusal order at 12.50pm and its receipt at 2.19pm while the hearing was proceeding in his absence. The tribunal accepted that the claimant had poor concentration and poor focus, but said the medical evidence did not show that he was unable to participate or make rational decisions. It noted that it had already considered adjustments, including breaks, that would allow the hearing to proceed fairly.

The tribunal rejected the claimant's complaints that his postponement application had not been considered, that the hearing length was unfair, and that the medical evidence had been ignored. It also rejected his application for recusal, applying the test in Porter v Magill and considering Ansar v Lloyds TSB Bank PLC, and concluded that there was no actual or apparent bias. No substantive findings were made on the merits of the underlying discrimination claims.