Meenal Pathak v Wipro Limited — 2025

The hearing on 3 June 2025 at London Central was listed for case management. The claimant, Meenal Pathak, did not attend and was not represented. The respondent, Wipro Limited, was represented by Miss H King, solicitor. The tribunal noted that the claimant had applied for postponement on 14 May 2025 and again on 30 May 2025. In the later application she said she would be travelling outside India, had requested to attend from India, was unsure whether she could attend from another country where she would be travelling for work, and stated that she was no longer in a position to continue and did not want to take the matter further because of the impact on her health. No medical evidence was provided.

Employment Judge Glennie refused the postponement request in a letter dated 2 June 2025, saying the claimant could join by video because she was not giving evidence and therefore did not require permission from the relevant country, and that the progress of the claim should not be delayed if that could be avoided. The letter was emailed to both parties at 10:05 am on 2 June 2025. On the day of the hearing, the tribunal clerk attempted to contact the claimant by phone and email and received no response by 10:38 am. The respondent also applied for strike out and told the tribunal that the claimant had not responded to emails about the bundle and case management agenda.

Taking account of the overriding objective and the claimant's non-attendance, the tribunal dismissed the claim in its entirety under rule 47. The judgment records no findings on the substance of the pleaded claims and no monetary remedy was awarded.