Mr L Rebouh v Warner Bros. Entertainment UK Limited and 2 others — 2025

At the preliminary hearing on 17 October 2025, heard by CVP, the claimant did not attend. The tribunal clerk telephoned him and the call went to voicemail, checked whether he had attended the hearing centre by mistake, and checked the tribunal inboxes for any email explaining his absence.

The judge recorded that the claimant had been participating in the case until at least 3 October 2025, when he sent evidence of his income for the deposit application and referred in his covering email to the directions for the preliminary hearing. The first and third respondents invited dismissal under Rule 47 because the claimant had not attended and had not contacted the tribunal. The second respondent's primary case was that the hearing could proceed in his absence and that the claims against RBKC should be struck out for want of jurisdiction; its secondary position was also for dismissal.

Applying Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024, and referring to Roberts v Skelmersdale College and Cooke v Glenrose Fish Co Ltd, the tribunal found that the claimant knew about the hearing and the applications, had not given any reason for not attending, and had not responded to the tribunal's attempts to contact him. The judge noted that a good reason, such as a medical emergency, might later be supported by evidence on a review application, but no such evidence was available at the hearing. The judgment therefore dismissed all claims against all respondents under Rule 47, with no merits determination and no remedy award recorded.