Miss Xiaoxian Zhan v Groupme Ltd — 2024

Miss Xiaoxian Zhan presented an ET1 on 10 May 2024, ticking boxes for arrears of pay, other payments, and another type of claim, with the free text entry “UI design fee”. Groupme Ltd filed a response on 26 June 2024 resisting the claim. The final hearing was listed for 24 October 2024 at the East London Hearing Centre by Cloud Video Platform, and the amended hearing notice was sent to both parties on 8 October 2024.

Neither party attended the hearing. The tribunal sat at 10.10am, adjourned briefly, and the clerk telephoned the claimant twice at 10.28am and 10.36am. An email was then sent at 10.43am warning that, if there was still no attendance by 11.00am, the hearing would proceed in absence and the claim might be dismissed. No reply was received from either party, and the tribunal had no contact telephone number for the respondent.

Applying Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013 and taking account of the available file, the tribunal concluded that there was no satisfactory explanation for the non-attendance. The judgment records that the claimant’s absence was capable of being explained by a decision not to pursue the claim, but no satisfactory explanation was provided. The tribunal considered it was not appropriate to hear the matter in the claimant’s absence because the claim required further details and evidence, and it therefore dismissed the claim. No substantive findings were made on the underlying pay dispute, and no remedy was awarded.