Miss S Scott-Emuakpor v HCL Social Care Ltd (in Voluntary Liquidation): 3310849/2022
JUDGMENT
Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 – Rule 21[1]The claim was issued in the South East Employment Tribunals. The respondent has failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge has decided that a determination can properly be made of the claim, or part of it, in accordance with rule 21 of the Rules of Procedure.[2]The claim succeeds and the remedy to which the claimant is entitled will be determined at a Remedy Hearing. _____________________________ Employment Judge R Lewis Date: 2.8.23REASONS
[1]This was the hearing to decide on remedy in accordance with a Judgment issued under rule 21 in the absence of any response to the claim from the respondent.[2]By letter of 31 March 2023 the claimant was directed to provide a schedule of loss. She did not do so.[3]At my request, a tribunal clerk telephoned the claimant this morning. The claimant said that she did not intend to take part in this hearing.[4]It did not seem to me right either to adjourn the hearing, or to dismiss the claim under rule 47. The better course seemed to me to proceed on the basis of the unchallenged ET1. Case Number: 3310849-2022 2 of 2[5]The ET1 indicates that the claimant was employed by the respondent for 2 weeks and two days, for 37.5 hours per week, at a rate of £35.00 per hour. It appears to state that the claimant was paid only at the rate of £25.00 per hour.[6]In the absence of any other evidence or submission I find that there has been a shortfall in pay to the claimant of £10.00 per hour for 90 hours, and issue Judgment accordingly.[7]I acknowledge that there have been delays in bringing this matter to a final hearing. As a Judge I have no authority to address or comment on the claimant’s correspondence on that topic.