Mr C Whittingham v v British Airways plc — 2023

The claimant was employed by British Airways plc from 1 April 2014 until 17 October 2020 and brought a claim for unfair dismissal. The hearing had previously been postponed for judicial resourcing reasons, and new hearing dates were notified on 16 July 2022.

The claimant did not attend the video hearing on 14 June 2023 and was not represented. After the clerk contacted him, he said he was at work in a new job, that the hearing had gone out of his mind because of personal issues, and that he had not prepared anything for the hearing.

The tribunal considered rule 47 and the overriding objective, including fairness to both parties. It noted the age of the dismissal, likely evidential difficulties from further delay, the long-notified hearing date, the respondent's attendance with witnesses and representatives, and the absence of a clear postponement application. The tribunal decided postponement would not be fair to the respondent and that it was not possible to proceed in the claimant's absence because the basis of the unfair dismissal case was unclear, so the claim was dismissed under rule 47.