Mr T Robertson v Southern Counties Liming Ltd c/o D Chandler: 1405490/2023
JUDGMENT
[1]The claim is dismissed for the Claimant’s failure to attend the hearing, pursuant to rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024.REASONS
[2]The Claimant’s claim is for unpaid pension contributions. The Respondent confirmed in its response that employer and employee pension contributions, including those owed to the Claimant, were accidentally not paid to the pension company. The business entered into a payment plan with the pension company once it realised what had happened and payments have been being made to rectify the error.[3]On 29 February 2024, the claim was stayed until 31 July 2024, by which time the Respondent expected the payments to have been made to the Claimant.[4]On 14 September 2024, the Claimant wrote to the Tribunal confirming that his pension statement showed that some of the monies he was claiming had been paid by the Respondent into his pension, but £1,691.14 was still owed.[5]On 29 October 2024, the parties were sent a Notice of Hearing setting out the details of the hearing and how to join via CVP. The Notice included case management orders that the parties needed to comply with to prepare for the hearing. The Claimant has not complied with those case management orders and has not been in contact with the Tribunal since 14 September 2024.[6]The Respondent applied on 22 April 2024 and 23 April 2024 for the hearing to be postponed. Those applications were refused, and it was confirmed on both occasions that the hearing remained listed for 24 April 2025. The Claimant was copied into the correspondence from the Tribunal.[7]The Claimant did not attend the hearing, which was scheduled to start at 2pm. The Tribunal’s clerk emailed the Claimant and made multiple attempts to contact him by telephone in an attempt to find out why the Claimant had failed to attend. Unfortunately, the Claimant could not be reached. The Tribunal’s email system was also checked, but no advance notice of non-attendance had been received from the Claimant.[8]Mr Chandler confirmed that the Respondent had not heard from the Claimant for months regarding the proceedings.[9]The Tribunal waited until 2:30pm before beginning the hearing, to give the Claimant more time to arrive. The Tribunal then discussed with Mr Chandler whether the amounts that had been claimed by the Claimant by way of unpaid pension payments had now been paid. Mr Chandler stated that payments had been made to the pension company in accordance with the payment plan the business had set up, but the payments were to make up the deficit the Respondent owed to all of its employees, and he was unsure how the pension company had then allocated those payments to individuals. He said that he had not been able to find out from the pension company whether any amounts are still owed to the Claimant’s pension. Mr Chandler said that he would like the claim against the Respondent to be struck out.[10]Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 provides: ‘If a party fails to attend or to be represented at a hearing, the Tribunal may dismiss the claim or proceed with the hearing in the absence of that party. Before doing so, it must consider any information which is available to it, after any enquiries that may be practicable, about the reasons for the party’s absence.’[11]The Tribunal was unable to determine the Claimant’s claim in his absence, as there was no evidence as to the current level of the Claimant’s pension and whether any monies remain outstanding.[12]The Tribunal was satisfied that the Claimant had been properly informed of the date and time of the hearing, and that he had been recently reminded that it was going ahead. Reasonable attempts were made to contact the Claimant to establish reasons for his non-attendance, but to no avail.[13]The Tribunal considered whether the hearing should be adjourned, or an Unless Order sent to the Claimant. However, the Tribunal did not consider this to be proportionate given the administrative time and cost involved in taking this action, in circumstances where:a. the Claimant has not engaged with the case management orders made on 29 October 2024;b. the Claimant confirmed on 14 September 2024 that some of the outstanding monies have now been paid;c. the Tribunal accepts that the Respondent has continued to make payments to the pension fund, so the Claimant may now have received all payments due; andd. the Claimant does not appear to be actively pursuing his claim.[14]The Claimant’s claim is therefore dismissed in accordance with rule 47 pursuant to his non-attendance at the hearing. Approved by: