Rhiannon Raymond-Hill v OCS Group UK Ltd — 2023

The claimant alleged discrimination based on maternity and/or pregnancy in various forms and a detriment because of making a protected disclosure. The respondent did not file an ET3, but the tribunal recorded that there was no indication the claim had not been properly served.

Neither party attended the hearing on 2 May 2025. The tribunal was satisfied that the claimant had been duly notified of the hearing and that no practicable enquiries could be made to contact her under Rule 47. The reasons noted that the claimant had been chased for a hearing bundle, had not provided a telephone number on the claim form, and that the email address shown on the form appeared to be incorrect.

The tribunal found there were no reasons apparent for the claimant's absence, no ongoing correspondence from her in the lead-up to the hearing, and no indication that she had sought a postponement. Applying Rule 47 and the overriding objective, Employment Judge Britton decided it would be disproportionate to adjourn the case to give the claimant further time.

The claim was therefore dismissed under Rule 47 because the claimant failed to attend the hearing. No substantive findings were made on the underlying pregnancy and maternity discrimination or whistleblowing allegations, and no remedy was awarded.