Mr R Clarke v National Tyre Service Ltd: 1405271/2023
JUDGMENT
The complaint that the claimant was unfairly dismissed is struck out.REASONS
[2]Section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires a claimant to have not less than two years service to make an unfair dismissal complaint.[3]The claimant was employed by the respondent for less than two years.[4]Therefore the claimant is not entitled to bring such a complaint.[5]The claimant has failed to give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so, why the complaint should not be struck out.[6]Accordingly, the complaint of unfair dismissal is struck out. The claimant’s other complaints are not affected by this judgment. Employment Judge Livesey Date: 27 November 2023 Judgment sent to the Parties: 12 December 2023 FOR THE TRIBUNAL OFFICE Case Number: 1405271/2023 1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr R Clarke Respondent: National Tyre Service Limited Heard at: Bristol (by CVP) On: 16 May 2024 Before: Employment Judge D Gray-Jones Representation Claimant: Did not attend and was not represented Respondent: Mr R Ford, Solicitor[1]The Claimant has failed to attend the scheduled final hearing, having been notified of the listing by the Tribunal on 02 January 2024. The Claimant’s application of 30 January 2024 to postpone the hearing was refused by EJ Self on 20 February 2024 for the reasons set out in that Order.[2]The Tribunal clerk has attempted to contact the Claimant using the mobile phone number and email address given by the Claimant in his ET1. There have been no responses to the voicemail message left and the email sent to the Claimant.[3]The Respondent has attended today having prepared a bundle and witness statements in compliance with the Tribunal’s Case Management Order of 02 January 2024. The Claimant has not provided any documents for the bundle and has not served a witness statement.[4]Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 (“the ET Rules”) provides: “47. Non-attendance 2 If a party fails to attend or to be represented at the hearing, the Tribunal may dismiss the claim or proceed with the hearing in the absence of the party. Before doing so it shall consider any information which is available to it, after any enquiries that may be practicable about the reasons for the party’s absence.”[5]Having considered the material available to the Tribunal the Tribunal is satisfied that the Claimant has chosen not to attend or participate in the hearing and in the circumstances it is appropriate to dismiss the claim under Rule 47. In reaching this decision the Tribunal has also had regard to Rule 2 of the ET Rules.