Ms BJ Foy v Ltd (In Liquidation) — 2018

The matter was listed for a three-day hearing on liability and remedy on 16 May 2018. Both parties were represented, but the claimant did not attend and had not contacted her solicitor. The tribunal clerk attempted to contact the claimant and left an urgent message, and the hearing was delayed briefly to allow time for a response.

The claimant's solicitor said he could not explain the non-attendance. He had met the claimant six days earlier to prepare for the hearing, and she knew it was proceeding, but she had not responded to later telephone calls or emails or completed action points needed to progress the claim. The solicitor sought a postponement, which the respondent opposed.

The tribunal considered the postponement request, the respondent's application to dismiss, and the alternative of requiring written reasons why the claim should not be struck out for not being actively pursued. Taking account of the claimant's absence, lack of explanation, non-response to attempts to contact her, and the respondent's readiness to proceed, the tribunal dismissed the claim under Rule 47. The judgment noted the claimant could apply for reconsideration under Rule 70 if advised to do so.