Claimant v Cramlington Precision Forge Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The claim was struck out for non-pursuit under Rule 38. The claimant failed to attend the preliminary hearing on 9 July 2025, did not notify the tribunal of inability to attend, did not complete the required agenda, and failed to respond to the unless order warning of potential strike-out.
Facts
The claimant Mr D Depczynski brought a claim against Cramlington Precision Forge Ltd. He failed to attend a preliminary hearing scheduled for 9 July 2025 via CVP video link, despite having received multiple notices including the hearing notice, an agenda from the respondent, and CVP joining details. He did not complete the required agenda before the hearing and did not inform the tribunal he would be unable to attend.
Decision
The tribunal issued an unless order on 25 July 2025 warning the claimant that the claim would be struck out for non-pursuit under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. The claimant failed to respond to this order or provide any explanation. Employment Judge Aspden struck out the claim on 3 December 2025, finding it had not been actively pursued and that strike-out was consistent with the overriding objective.
Practical note
Unrepresented claimants must engage with tribunal procedures and attend scheduled hearings; failure to respond to an unless order warning of strike-out will result in dismissal of the claim.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6005824/2025
- Decision date
- 3 December 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- manufacturing
- Represented
- Yes
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No