Ms Tiffany Gordon v Jacaranda Healthcare Ltd: 3320553/2019
JUDGMENT
[1]The claim is dismissed as it has not been actively pursued (Rule 37(i) (d) Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.REASONS
[1]In her claim form the claimant has given a postal address, an email address and a mobile phone number.[2]Form ET3 response was sent to the claimant’s postal address and returned “Return to sender no longer here.”[3]The claimant was emailed on 22 October 2019 requesting notification of any change of address.[4]The full merits hearing scheduled for 6 April 2020 was converted to a telephone preliminary hearing and the claimant was notified by email as the file was marked “tel no. invalid”. Case Number: 3320553/2019[5]On 6 April 2020 the claimant did not attend the hearing and Employment Judge Bedeau was not able to contact her on the mobile number.[6]The preliminary hearing order setting down this hearing for 10am, 7 December 2020 was sent by email to the claimant on 7 April 2020.[7]A reminder of the hearing was sent to the claimant by email on 2 December 2020.[8]At 10am today the claimant was not present. The clerk has rung the claimant’s mobile number and an automated response says the number cannot be connected. An email was sent at 10.07 to the claimant enquiring if she would be attending. There has been no response.[9]The hearing began at 10.45. In the circumstances I decided to proceed with the hearing in the claimant’s absence. Strike out[10]The preliminary hearing directed that a joint bundle be agreed, and witness statements exchanged. This has not happened. Mr Roddy has been unable to contact the claimant despite several attempts.[11]Given the history, the claimant’s failure to comply with directions and the claimant’s non attendance, I have struck out the claim as it has not been actively pursued.