Mr A Puthiyaveettil v ZeeDee Global Ltd: 3314970/2023
JUDGMENT
The Claimant’s claim for unpaid wages is dismissed.REASONS
[1]The Claimant’s claim is for unpaid wages (arrears of pay) in the total sum of just under £800.[2]In a letter sent to the parties by the Tribunal on 22 November 2024, the case was listed to be heard at 2pm on 13 February 2025. The hearing was originally to be an in person hearing but was converted to a video hearing and the link for joining the hearing was sent to the parties.[3]On the morning of the hearing, the Claimant contacted the Tribunal asking for his claim to be rescheduled to the end of the month on grounds that he had “a prior scheduled appointment”. He gave no further detail.[4]His request to reschedule was refused by the Regional Employment Judge.[5]I waited until 2.15 pm in order to see if either party would attend. Neither, it appeared, had complied with directions for filing either a bundle of documents or witness statements with the Tribunal. It was for the Claimant to prove his claim.[6]I considered whether I should dismiss the Claimant’s claim pursuant to rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure. I considered the information available to me, including the fact that the Claimant had only notified the Case Number: 3314970/2023 Tribunal that he could not attend the hearing today, a few hours before the hearing was listed to start, and had given no reasons as to why his application to postpone was so late or as to what the “prior scheduled appointment” was and when it had been arranged.[7]The documents on the Tribunal file did not, on their own, enable me to uphold the Claimant’s claim and, having considered those documents and the stated reason for the Claimant’s absence, my decision was that the claim should be dismissed. Approved by