Mr Owusu v Chariot Clean FM Ltd: 3201807/2023
JUDGMENT
Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 – Rule 22.[1]The claims were issued in the East London Employment Tribunals. The Respondent did provide an ET3 and an initial response to the claim however has failed to attend case management hearings and comply with directions. This culminated in the Tribunal issuing a “unless order” dated the 02 May 2025 giving the Respondent until the 30 May 2025 to respond to previous Tribunal Orders. The Tribunal and the Claimant did not receive a response to that Order and therefore the Respondent is barred from defending the claim and the ET3 response is therefore struck out.[2]Further, the Respondent explained to the Tribunal following enquiries as to whether they would be attending at the start of this hearing that they were in voluntary liquidation and that they would not be attending the hearing. The Claimant submitted a strike out application on the basis of a history of non- compliance and the Unless Order. This was forwarded to the Respondent for completeness. Case No: 3201807/2023[3]The Tribunal did seek to contact the Respondent following the application being forwarded but to no avail. In any event the Tribunal reassured itself of the wording of the “unless order” and confirmed that the Respondent was barred from proceedings and the ET3 was struck out.[4]The Claimant’s claim for unfair dismissal is well founded and the Respondent is ordered to pay the amount of £15,284 ( Calculated on loss of statutory rights £500 + past losses £7296 (weekly pay £192 x 38 weeks) +future losses £7488 (weekly pay £192 x 39 weeks).[5]The Claimant’s claim for wrongful dismissal is well founded in respect of notice pay and the Respondent is ordered to pay the amount of £385 (net weekly pay £192 x 2 weeks).[6]The Claimant’s claim for unlawful deduction of wages is week founded in respect of holiday pay the Respondent is ordered to pay the amount of 385. £385 (net weekly pay £192 x 2 weeks).[7]The Claimant’s claim for direct disability discrimination is well founded and the Respondent is ordered to pay the amount of £7625 (£5000 for injury to feelings based on 2023 vento bands + 5.25 percent interest rate increase).[8]The Claimant’s claim for legal costs was not awarded on the basis that a costs application which contains specificity should be submitted if legal costs are pursued.[9]Failure to follow ACAS increase by 10 percent £26046.90 (23, 679 + by 10 percent interest rate £2367).[10]The Respondent is responsible for deducting any tax and national insurance contributions at source. Approved by