Mrs J Russell v Respondent — 2026

Mrs J Russell's claim was dismissed under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because she failed to attend the preliminary hearing on 15 April 2026. The hearing was intended to determine jurisdictional time-limit issues and had been arranged to begin at 10:00, with a full day allowed to accommodate the claimant's neurodiversity.

On the morning of the hearing, the claimant sought a delayed start and permission to participate remotely. Employment Judge M Whitcombe refused both applications because of their timing, the absence of medical evidence showing that the claimant could not reasonably attend on time or in person, and the potential prejudice to the respondent. The claimant was informed of those decisions by telephone and indicated that she expected to arrive before 12:00.

The claimant had not arrived by 12:00 and had provided no further explanation or information about difficulties in transit. The Tribunal found that her absence left insufficient time to conduct the hearing at the pace previously agreed as necessary for fairness. A further adjournment would also have caused substantial delay and additional attendance costs for the respondent. The Tribunal concluded that the claimant had been given an entirely reasonable opportunity to attend and had provided no sufficient reason for her absence.

It was common ground that the claim had been presented outside the primary time limit. Under section 123(1)(b) of the Equality Act 2010, the claimant bore the burden of establishing that it had been brought within such other period as was just and equitable. The Tribunal saw little purpose in proceeding without her evidence and concluded that dismissal was fair and consistent with the overriding objective. No substantive claim was determined on its merits and no monetary remedy was awarded or addressed.