Mr J Yusuf v L Harvey: 2202079/2024
JUDGMENT
The claim is struck out.REASONS
[1]By a letter dated 6 June 2024 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations or to request a hearing, as to why the claim should not be struck out because the claimant failed to attend a hearing on 5 June 2024 and the claim was not being actively pursued.[2]The claimant has failed to make representations in writing, or has failed to make any sufficient representations, why this should not be done or to request a hearing. The only correspondence received was a short email on 7 June 2024 objecting to the respondent’s representative being copied into correspondence and noting various difficulties with communication.[3]Instructions were sent by Employment Judge Glennie by letter dated 13 June 2024 which informed the claimant who the respondent’s representative was and noted that the date for replying to the Tribunal’s letter of 6 June 2024 remained in force.[4]No further response was received from the claimant.[5]On 17 July 2024 I gave a further opportunity to the claimant to have a hearing to explain in person why he had not provided a substantive response to the letter of 6 June 2024 and why he did not attend the hearing on 5 June 2024. The parties were ordered to provide dates to avoid for such a hearing by 22 July 2024. The claimant was also requested to provide details of any assistance he would require to help him access the hearing. The letter warned that if the claimant did not 6.2 Strike out Judgment – claim - rule 37 Case No:2202079/2024 respond (or did not attend the hearing) it was likely that his claim would be struck out.[6]The claimant did not respond to that order.[7]The claimant has failed actively to pursue his claim, including not attending the hearing on 5 June 2024 and not liaising with the respondent. He has not responded to the strike out warning letter dated 6 June 2024 and has now breached further orders which were intended to give him a full opportunity to respond. This is despite multiple opportunities being given to the claimant to explain his position.[8]Having given the claimant such opportunities, to which he has not responded, there are no less draconian sanctions which might be put in place to progress this matter further.[9]In the circumstances it is proportionate and in the interests of justice that the claim be struck out.