Mr G Alborino v Italian Catering Concept Ltd: 2417965/2018
JUDGMENT
The complaint of Failure to Pay a Redundancy Payment is struck out.REASONS
[1]By a letter dated 11 January 2019 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations or to request a hearing, as to why the complaint should not be struck out because the claimant did not have two years’ service.[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 complaint is therefore struck out.[3]The claimant’s remaining claim(s) remains listed for hearing on 20 September 2019. Regional Employment Judge Parkin Date: 29 March 2019[1]The Tribunal today was listed to hear the claimant’s complaints of unlawful deduction from wages. Notice of Hearing was sent to the parties on 12 March 2019. Further, the claimant’s claim for a redundancy payment was struck out, and the judgment sent to him on 3 April 2019. Mention was made in that document of this hearing date.[2]Whilst the claimant indicated he would be out of the country from April for three months, he made no comment on the hearing date when it was sent to him. Case No. 2417965/18 2[3]The case was called on at 10.00 a.m., but neither party was present. A check was made again later in the morning, but no one had attended.[4]In these circumstances the Tribunal has power to dismiss the claimant’s claims under Rule 47 of the Tribunals rules of procedure, if that party does not attend or is represented at the hearing, provided that the Tribunal has first considered all the information which is available to it after any enquiries that may be practicable about the reason for the parties absence.[5]The Tribunal did not make any enquiries at the time, but now gives the claimant this opportunity to explain his absence and lack of communication. If none is forthcoming, the Tribunal’s ruling in relation to the claimant’s claims will be that they are dismissed under Rule 47.[6]Should the claimant, however, satisfy the Tribunal that there was good reason for his absence, the respondent will be required to show cause why its response should not be struck out under rule 37 for its unreasonable conduct in not attending the hearing either, and/or (depending upon the position) for apparent breach of the Tribunal’s orders made on 12 March 2019. Employment Judge Holmes Date: 20 September 2019