Mr. James Ball v Bournemouth Cycleworks Limited (In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) — 2026

Mr James Ball did not attend the final hearing on 29 May 2026 and had not contacted the Tribunal to explain his absence. The Tribunal had given approximately four months' notice of the hearing, sent the CVP link and joining instructions, and attempted to contact him by telephone and email after he failed to join.

The respondent was not actively participating and was in creditors' voluntary liquidation. Although Mr Ball had supplied a witness statement and Schedule of Loss, the Tribunal found that the limited documentation did not clearly explain the basis of all complaints or calculations. It concluded that liability and remedy could not fairly be determined without his further evidence, while an adjournment would cause delay without assurance that he would resume participation.

Taking account of the overriding objective, the Tribunal dismissed under Rule 47 the claims of unfair dismissal, accrued holiday pay, notice pay, unlawful deduction of wages, and breach of contract concerning sales commission and arrears of pay. In the alternative, applying Rule 38(1)(d) and the guidance in Evans and another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, it found that Mr Ball's unexplained non-attendance and lack of response amounted to a failure actively to pursue the complaints and struck them out. No remedy was awarded.