Hannah Burns v Hopkinson and Sons Ltd — 2025

The hearing on 17 June 2025 was converted from a private preliminary hearing to a public preliminary hearing because the claim appeared to have been presented outside the applicable time limit. The tribunal noted that Acas Early Conciliation had not started until just under five months after the normal time limit had expired, and the claimant had been ordered to provide a witness statement explaining the lateness. She did not do so.

The claimant did not attend the hearing. The clerk telephoned the mobile number given on the claim form, but there was no answer. The judge explained to the respondent that the options were to adjourn or to dismiss under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024, and the respondent invited dismissal. The tribunal dismissed the claims under rule 47 because the claimant failed to attend without explanation, and alternatively under rule 38 because the claims were not being actively pursued.

The judgment also noted that the claim form was unclear. The claimant had ticked disability discrimination and unfair dismissal, but the tribunal recorded that she did not have the two years' service needed for unfair dismissal. It also noted that, insofar as she was alleging a disability-related dismissal, the claim form identified dyslexia but did not explain how that was linked to dismissal; the response referred to anxiety, but anxiety was not identified in the claim form. Box 8.2 also referred to wrongful dismissal, which the tribunal treated as a claim before it, but no explanation was provided for the late start to Acas Early Conciliation.