Mr C Campbell v Hiver Beers Ltd: 2302206/2025
JUDGMENT
[1]The claim is struck out.REASONS
[2]This claim was listed for a final hearing due to take place on 29th August 2025.[3]On 28th August 2025 the claimant e-mailed the Tribunal requesting the final hearing be postponed and re-listed on 5th September 2025. No reason was given for requesting the postponement.[4]Also on 28th August 2025 the respondent replied opposing a postponement.[5]Due to the lateness of the claimant’s request, the Tribunal did not respond before the hearing time. Accordingly, the claimant’s request for a postponement was not granted, and the parties were expected to attend the hearing as listed. Case Number: 2302206/2025[6]Ms Rhodes attended the hearing on behalf of the respondent, the claimant did not attend. The Tribunal e-mailed and telephone the claimant seeking clarification about whether he would be joining the hearing. There was no answer from the claimant.[7]By rule 32(3)(a), where a party requests a postponement less than 7 days before the hearing, the Tribunal may only postpone the hearing where both parties agree, and a postponement is practicable and appropriate to give the parties an opportunity to resolve their dispute by agreement, or it is in the interests of justice.[8]In this case the request to postpone was sent one day before the hearing, and the respondent opposed the request. Therefore the criteria at rule 32(3) were not met. In any event, absent any reason being provided, the Tribunal was not able to assess whether it was in the interests of justice to grant the postponement.[9]Because the hearing had not been postponed, the hearing went ahead as scheduled. However, the claimant did not attend the hearing, nor respond to the Tribunal’s enquiries regarding his non-attendance. Consequently, the Tribunal struck out his claim. Approved by: