In person For the v Respondent — 2024

The case was originally listed for hearing on 18 and 19 July 2024. Before that hearing the respondent applied to strike out the claim because no witness statement had been filed and there had been a history of the claimant and his then lay representative failing to respond to communications. When the hearing began, the claimant sought a postponement, and Employment Judge Manley granted it and ordered him to file a witness statement.

At the resumed hearing on 29 August 2024 before Employment Judge Anderson, with lay members S Blunden and R Allen, the claimant again had not filed a witness statement. He said he had been in discussion with the respondent since June about withdrawing the claim, that he was unwell, and that he had no representation. His connection was poor and, after adjournments intended to allow contact, he did not return to the hearing or communicate with the tribunal or the respondent.

The tribunal struck out the claim under Employment Tribunal Rules 37(1)(b) and (d). It found that the proceedings had been conducted unreasonably because the claimant had twice failed to file a witness statement despite clear orders, had not responded to the respondent's communications, and had not explained his absence from the hearing. It also found that the claim had not been actively pursued because he did not return after the short adjournment and offered no explanation. No merits findings or remedy were made.