AADIL GIRACH v Hastings Insurance Services Limited — 2026

The tribunal dismissed Aadil Girach’s claims against Hastings Insurance Services Limited for unfair dismissal, breach of contract and unauthorised deductions from wages in full under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024. The dismissal followed his non-attendance at the preliminary hearing in Leicester on 17 August 2026. The tribunal did not determine the merits of the claims.

The hearing had been listed to decide whether the tribunal had jurisdiction to hear claims which the reasons described as more than four months late. Girach had not supplied the witness statement ordered by Judge Butler explaining why it had not been reasonably practicable to present them within the statutory time limit. The respondent had also applied to strike out the claims for failure to comply with orders made to prepare for the hearing.

At the judge’s request, the clerk telephoned Girach. He said he had forgotten the hearing because his wife had recently been in labour and would prefer a postponement, while recognising that this might not be possible. The tribunal rejected his explanation that he had forgotten, referring to the respondent’s emails of 4 and 7 August 2026 about his non-compliance. It found that he had not been engaging with the proceedings for some time and had decided not to attend.

The tribunal considered an unless order or a strike-out warning but concluded that neither was likely to have any effect. It also considered proceeding in his absence, but lacked his witness statement on the time-limit issue and an explanation for his failure to comply with the orders. It dismissed the proceedings under Rule 47, applying the overriding objective in Rule 3 and citing the lack of progress, further time and costs, and the use of hearing time that could have been allocated to other tribunal users. No monetary award was recorded.