Did not appear and was not represented For the v Mr Lomax, Solicitor — 2022

The claimant brought a single claim of unfair dismissal arising from the termination of his employment on 1 December 2021. After the claim and response were presented, the tribunal issued standard directions on disclosure, document exchange, schedule of loss, witness statements, and bundle preparation by letter dated 19 June 2022. The claimant did not comply with those directions.

At the start of November 2022, the respondent asked the tribunal to consider strike out under Rule 37(1)(c) because of the claimant’s non-compliance. A strike out warning letter was sent on 24 November 2022, but the claimant did not explain his failure to comply or give any assurance that he would do so. He later said he could not attend the hearing because of work commitments, and on the morning of 2 December 2022 said he was unwell, but he did not identify the illness or provide evidence. The tribunal treated the messages as applications for postponement, refused to postpone, and proceeded in the claimant’s absence under Rule 47.

Having considered the overriding objective and the extent of the default, the tribunal found complete non-compliance and no explanation for it. It held that the claimant had not participated in the case in any meaningful way, that the respondent had been caused unfairness and prejudice, and that a fair hearing could not proceed. The tribunal concluded that a lesser sanction would not be appropriate and struck out the claim. No remedy was awarded.