Miss M R Hall v Riverside Rooms Catering Company Ltd (in Voluntary Liquidation): 3302186/2024
JUDGMENT
The claimant’s claims with the above case number (they are for a redundancy payment and unpaid accrued holiday pay) are dismissed under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024.REASONS
[1]The claims made in these proceedings are for a redundancy payment and unpaid accrued holiday pay. The respondent was in creditors’ voluntary liquidation, and the claimant had been asked (at the direction of Employment Judge Warren) in a letter dated 22 January 2026 from the tribunal, “As your former employer is insolvent, have you applied to the Insolvency Service for your redundancy payment?” Case Number: 3302186/2024[2]For whatever reason, the claimant did not attend the start of the hearing to determine her claims which was listed to take place on 13 March 2026 and which I conducted. Nor did the claimant’s former employer, which I treat as the only respondent, as neither of the two persons whose names were on the claim form as respondents, but whose address was the name of the employer (“Riverside Rooms Catering Company limited”) followed by the place at which the claimant worked, was responsible for paying the claimant’s wages. The respondent had informed the tribunal of its intention not to attend in an email sent on Thursday 12 March 2026 by the insolvency practitioners who were the appointed liquidator of the respondent.[3]I waited until 10.30am on 13 March 2026 before concluding that the claimant was also not going to attend the hearing.[4]In the circumstances, rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 applied. That provides: “If a party fails to attend or to be represented at a hearing, the Tribunal may dismiss the claim or proceed with the hearing in the absence of that party. Before doing so, it must consider any information which is available to it, after any enquiries that may be practicable, about the reasons for the party’s absence.”[5]There were no figures for the claimant’s salary in the ET1.[6]I decided that the claim should be dismissed on the basis that it was in the interests of justice to do so and on the basis that if the claimant subsequently needed a judgment in her favour, then she could apply for a reconsideration of this judgment, supplying figures for her claimed unpaid holiday pay and her claimed redundancy payment (or at least her gross weekly pay), so that a judgment for such sums as it was appropriate to award could be given. Approved by