Mr A Moran v Halfords Autocentres Ltd: 8001255/2025
JUDGMENT
The claim is struck out under the provisions of rule 38(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 on the basis that it has not been actively pursued.REASONS
[1]The case was listed for a case management preliminary hearing at 10am on 16 July 2025 to take place by video. The claimant e-mailed the tribunal office at 7.32am on the 16 July 2025 to say he would be unable to attend the hearing due “an unexpected family emergency”.[2]The application for postponement was granted and the tribunal wrote to the claimant on 16 July 2025 as follows; “The claimant is required to provide to the Employment Tribunal evidence of the emergency that has prevented the claimant being able to attend today. It is understood this emergency is health related, and accordingly evidence should be obtainable. The claimant must provide this evidence by no later than 28 days from today. This extended deadline has been deliberately set to avoid placing the claimant under further pressure during the current family emergency.”[3]On 25 September 2025 a reminder was sent to the claimant to produce the medical evidence by 2 October 2025. The time limit for so doing has passed and the claimant failed to respond.[4]On 13 October 2025 a further reminder was sent to the claimant to produce the medical evidence by 21 October 2025. The time limit for so doing has passed and the claimant failed to respond.[5]On 31 October 2025 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to give reasons by 7 November 2025 why the claim should not be struck out as it had not been actively pursued. The time limit for so doing has passed and the claimant has failed to respond.[6]The claim is therefore struck out under the provisions of rule 38(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 on the ground that it has not been actively pursued.