Mr J Reid v The Alchemist: 3201710/2023
JUDGMENT
The Claimant having failed to attend the hearing, his claims are dismissed under rule 47.REASONS
[1]The Claimant failed to attend the full merits hearing of his case. The hearing had been listed in November 2023.[2]The Claimant did not provide a telephone number on his ET1 form. The Tribunal staff obtained from the Respondent the last contact number they had for the Claimant. Tribunal staff called the Claimant on the telephone number provided by the Respondent but the call went straight to voicemail. A message was left for the Claimant to contact the Tribunal but he did not do so.[3]Tribunal staff emailed the Claimant on the email address provided in form ET1 asking him to contact the Tribunal to explain his absence but received no answer.[4]The Tribunal staff asked Ms Hanson whether the Respondent had any indication of the reasons why the Claimant had not attended, but she confirmed the Respondent had had no contact from the Claimant.[5]I note that the Claimant provided no response to the strike out warning in relation to his unfair dismissal claim sent on 23 October 2023 and that the Claimant failed to comply with the case management orders sent to him by Case Number: 3201710/2023 the Tribunal on 15 November 2023. The Claimant also did not reply to or object to the Respondent’s application made on 8 January 2024 to postpone today’s hearing or the Respondent’s subsequent correspondence seeking clarification of the amounts claimed by the Claimant. I note that this correspondence was sent by the Respondent both by email and by post but there is no definitive confirmation that either has actually been received.[6]As it currently stands, the scope of the remaining parts of the Claimant’s case is unclear (notably as to the amounts he says he is owed) and he has failed to comply with the orders of the Tribunal and the requests from the Respondent to provide the necessary details.[7]I consider in those circumstances that following the Claimant’s failure to attend today, and having made all practicable enquiries about that failure to attend, it is proportionate to dismiss his claims. I do not consider it would be appropriate to postpone the case as there is no evidence before me that the Claimant intends to progress his case.[8]Accordingly, the Claimant’s claims are dismissed under rule 47.