Ms Laurhyn Mill v Respondent — 2023

The claimant presented claims following ACAS conciliation, and the tribunal held a preliminary hearing process in relation to disability and case management. At the hearing on 30 August 2023, the claimant said she had already obtained her medical records and that they were with a solicitor considering the papers. The September 2023 case management note recorded directions requiring further particulars, including confirmation of whether the claimant was proceeding with unfair dismissal, whistleblowing and disability discrimination claims, together with supporting details and documents.

The tribunal subsequently listed a preliminary hearing in Dundee for 22 November 2023 and sent notices confirming that the hearing would be in person and would determine whether the claimant was disabled at the relevant time. When the claimant did not comply with the directions in full and did not attend the hearing, the tribunal considered the respondent's request to strike out the claim. The claimant emailed medical records on 16 November 2023, but on the hearing date she was not present and later emailed saying she had thought the hearing was at 2 pm and believed it was still a phone hearing, asking for rescheduling.

The employment judge treated the respondent's strike-out request as a request for dismissal under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 on the ground that the claimant had failed to attend or be represented. Having regard to the claimant's earlier statements, the prior notice of the in-person hearing, the non-compliance with orders, and the later communications, the tribunal concluded that dismissal was appropriate under the overriding objective. The judgment records that the claim was dismissed and notes that the claimant may apply for reconsideration within 14 days if appropriate.