Miss Danielle Landy v So Criss House of Nails Ltd — 2023

The claimant, Miss Danielle Landy, brought a claim saying that she had not been paid the correct amount in wages by the respondent, SO Criss House of Nails Ltd. The respondent had never presented a response to the claim. The matter was listed for a telephone hearing on 2 February 2023 at the East London Hearing Centre, but neither party attended and tribunal staff were unable to contact either side.

The judgment records that there had already been a previous failure by both parties to attend a telephone hearing on 30 August 2022 before Employment Judge Yale. After that hearing, orders were made requiring the claimant to provide a schedule of loss within 14 days and requiring both parties to write to the tribunal explaining their non-attendance and why they had been uncontactable. No contact was received from either party in response to those orders.

Employment Judge Hook noted the duty under Rule 2 of the Employment Tribunal Rules for parties to assist the tribunal and co-operate with the overriding objective. The tribunal found repeated non-compliance with tribunal rules and orders, and also found that the claim was not being actively pursued. It considered that adjourning the case to a third hearing would not be constructive and would waste tribunal resources.

The tribunal also noted that the claimant would have been asked to give evidence about the unpaid wages she said she was owed and how she calculated that figure, but in her absence the tribunal could not assess the evidence or decide whether the claim was well founded. The claim was therefore struck out in its entirety under Rule 37. No substantive finding was made on the underlying wages issue and no monetary award was made.