R Raymond-Hill v OCS Group UK Ltd: 6012903/2024
JUDGMENT
The judgment of the Tribunal is that the claim is dismissed under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules and Procedure, the Claimant not having attended the Hearing.REASONS
[1]The Claimant has claimed discrimination based on maternity and/or pregnancy in various forms and also that she has been subjected to a detriment because of making a protected disclosure. However, notwithstanding that the Claimant was notified that this case was listed to be heard and had received correspondence chasing her to provide a hearing bundle, she did not attend. The Clerk was directed to ring the Claimant, but it was discovered that the Claimant had not provided a telephone number on the Claim Form and, on the face of it, the Claimant's email address as stated on the Claim Form was also incorrect.[2]The Respondent failed to file an ET3 Response Form but there was no indication that the claim had not been properly served.[3]Neither party has attended the Hearing. I am satisfied that the Claimant was duly notified and I am satisfied that no practicable enquiries could be made to contact her under Rule 47. On the face of it, there were no reasons for the Claimant's absence, there had been no ongoing correspondence from her in the lead up to this Hearing and no indication that she had sought a postponement. PHCM Order 1 of 2 September 2023 Case Number: 6012903/2024[4]In the circumstances, I have decided that it is appropriate to dismiss the claim under Rule 47 because the Claimant has failed to attend. I have considered the overriding objective to deal with cases fairly and justly. It was disproportionate to adjourn the case in accordance with the Tribunals own powers for the Claimant to be given further time as she had not made contact with the Tribunal or sought to explain her absence. I have therefore proceeded to dismiss the claim.