Ms K Ward and Ms K Lessels v BWS Catering Services Ltd and others: 4107428/2020 and 4107422/2020
JUDGMENT
[1]Ms Ward’s claim is dismissed following its withdrawal on 8 November 2021; and ETZ4(WR)[2]Ms Lessels’ claim is dismissed under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, on the grounds of her non-attendance at the hearing on the merits on 16 November 2021.REASONS
[1]The claimants each presented claims to the Employment Tribunal against the respondents. The first claimant complained that she had been unfairly dismissed and sustained unlawful deductions from wages, and the second claimant complained about unlawful deductions from her wages.[2]A Hearing was listed to commence on 16 November 2021 in the Edinburgh Employment Tribunal, with Mr and Mrs Munro participating remotely by CVP from their home in Spain.[3]Mrs Munro, with her husband the second respondents, attended the hearing in advance of the scheduled time, namely 10am, by CVP. Mr Simpson, for the first respondent, also attended the hearing, but in person.[4]Neither claimant nor Mrs Lessels, the third respondent, attended the hearing.[5]The clerk contacted Ms Ward by telephone and was told by her that that she had emailed the Tribunal on 8 November 2021 to withdraw her claim. Having checked the position, the clerk confirmed that this was indeed the case, but that the correspondence had not been linked to the file as it did not bear the case number on its heading or in the body of the message.[6]She also contacted Ms Lessels, but, having been unable to speak to her, left a voicemail message for her.[7]I explained to Mrs Munro and Mr Simpson that Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 allows a Tribunal to consider dismissal of a claim in the event that the claimant does not attend or arrange to be represented at a hearing. I confirmed that in the circumstances I considered it to be in the interests of justice to dismiss both claims, for the following reasons.[8]With regard to Ms Ward, she wrote to the Tribunal on 8 November 2021 to confirm that “I also withdrawn my claim on Friday” (sic). As a result, her claim is dismissed following its withdrawal.[9]With regard to Ms Lessels, the position was less clear, but she was unable to be contacted on the date given for the hearing; she did not attend the hearing, nor did she contact the Tribunal Office to notify them of her intentions or seek a postponement of the hearing; and in Ms Ward’s email, she made reference to having “also” withdrawn her claim.[10]In the circumstances, it appeared to me to be in the interests of justice to dismiss Ms Lessels’ claim under Rule 47. The first and second respondents had attended the hearing, and were prepared to defend the claims. No indication was given by Ms Lessels that she did not wish to pursue her claim, but she did not attend nor make any effort to advise the Tribunal that she would not attend.[11]Accordingly, all claims are now dismissed and these proceedings are at an end.