Mr K Cowan v MJ’s Braehead Ltd (in Liquidation) c/o Kepstorn Solicitors: 8002231/2025
JUDGMENT
The claim is dismissed under rule 47 of The Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 as the claimant did not attend the Final Hearing on 2 July 2026.REASONS
[1]This is an undefended Claim. On 21 January 2026 a Final Hearing as to remedy alone took place. The claimant attended remotely. He had not provided documents to support the claims he made, and was not able to set out clearly what the proper quantification of his claims was. He said that he had documents that he could send in, and I agreed that he could do so. They were expected to be received within 7 days.[2]The claimant did not provide any documents. A reminder was sent to him on 28 January 2026 with a direction that they be received within 7 days. The claimant did not respond.[3]A further reminder was sent on 9 February 2026 asking for a reply by return. The claimant did not do so.[4]A Notice of Final Hearing (remedy) was sent to the claimant on 25 February 2026 for a hearing at 10am on 2 July 2026 for a period of two hours.[5]As I was asked to do another case starting at 09.30 an email was sent to the claimant to ask if the hearing could commence at 11am. The claimant replied to the effect that that was not convenient to him. On 1 July 2026 at 13.38, an email was sent to the claimant to confirm that the hearing would remain at 10am on 2 July 2026.[6]The claimant did not attend the hearing. He sent an email at 10.01 on 2 July 2026 stating “Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to join today’s hearing due to work commitments. If a little more notice could be provided in future, I’d be able to arrange the necessary time off work to attend.”[7]Notice had been given on 25 February 2026. That included details if an application to postpone was to be made.[8]In light of the circumstances, I consider that the claimant has failed to attend the Final Hearing and that it is appropriate under Rule 47, having regard also to the overriding objective in Rule 3, to dismiss the claim. That is as the claimant has had a number of opportunities to provide the evidence necessary to establish his claim, did not timeously seek a postponement, and it is not appropriate to make further use of the limited resources of the Tribunal having regard to the background.[9]The claim is therefore dismissed.