Mr C Edmonds v Breezemount Services Ltd — 2023

Mr Edmonds did not attend the hearing on 1 November 2023. The tribunal noted that the original hearing notice had been sent to the claimant’s union representative and then directly to the claimant on 25 October 2023, and that the tribunal clerk telephoned the number given on the ET1 without success. The tribunal was satisfied that the claimant knew about the hearing and had given no explanation for his absence.

The claim was therefore dismissed under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules. For completeness, the tribunal also recorded that directions had been issued on 12 September 2023 for standard disclosure and witness statements, that the respondent had sent a bundle and witness statements from Mr Vajushi and Ms Barwick, and that the claimant had not provided any witness statement. The tribunal said the ET1 contained only three lines of printed text, and that no further information was available from the claimant.

The tribunal added that, even if the claim had not been dismissed for non-attendance, it would have been struck out under Rule 37(b) and (e) because the claimant had not complied with the directions and the tribunal considered that a fair hearing within the allotted hearing time was no longer possible.