Ms A Adan v Roost Opco 1 Ltd T/a Student Roost: 6029516/2025
JUDGMENT
The claim of unfair dismissal is struck out. The remaining claims of discrimination on the grounds of age, pregnancy or maternity, religion or belief, disability, harassment and victimisation are dismissed. The claims for unpaid wages and whistleblowing detriment are also dismissed.REASONS
[1]At the last preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Brewer on 27 February 2026, the Claimant, without prior notice, failed to attend. The attempt to contact her by telephone on that day was met with no answer. EJ Brewer gave a strike out warning in relation to the unfair dismissal claim as the Claimant did not have the requisite two years continuous employment in order to bring such a claim. The Claimant did not reply to the strike out warning so the claim of unfair dismissal is struck out.[2]EJ Brewer also made orders in relation to the other claims brought by the Claimant. Specifically, she was ordered to give further information about her claims in order that the Respondent and the Tribunal could understand them. The Claimant failed to comply with those orders. The claims referred to in this judgment represent those which are specifically claimed by the Claimant or mentioned without any certainty as to whether they are being pursued as such. Case No: 6029516/2025[3]By an email dated 27 January 2026 (which must have been an error since it referred to non-attendance at the hearing on 27 February 2026), the Claimant said she was unable to attend the hearing due to her mental health issues, her father's illness, her broken telephone and her living conditions.[4]This morning the Claimant did not attend the hearing. As she had not attended by 8 minutes after 10am, I directed the clerk to try to contact the Claimant. The Claimant answered the call but disconnected when the clerk identified herself as calling from the Tribunal. The clerk tried again but received a recorded message saying the Claimant was on another line.[5]I am satisfied that the Claimant received the summary and orders given by EJ Brewer at the last preliminary hearing and so was well aware of today's hearing. She was also copied in to correspondence from the Respondent's solicitors and reminded of the hearing by the Tribunal who sent joining instructions for today's hearing to both parties on 17 July 2026.[6]In not replying to correspondence from the Tribunal and the Respondent's solicitors, failing to attend two preliminary hearings or comply with the Tribunal's case management orders, it is clear that the Claimant is not actively pursuing her claims. The action taken by EJ Brewer, the Tribunal's correspondence to the Claimant and the actions directed to be taken by me today all comply with the requirements of Rule 47 of the Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024 relating to dismissal of claims for non-attendance at a hearing. Accordingly, with the exception of the unfair dismissal claim which is struck out, the remaining claims are dismissed. Approved by: