Claimant v Tank Consult Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The claim was struck out under Rule 47 for non-pursuit. This was the second hearing the claimant failed to attend without explanation or contact with the Tribunal. The claimant did not request a postponement or provide medical evidence despite clear notice that this was required.
Facts
Mr Leigh brought claims against Tank Consult Ltd but failed to attend two scheduled preliminary hearings without explanation or prior contact with the Tribunal. The hearing scheduled for 27 November 2025 was intended to clarify what the claimant's claims were about. The notice of hearing dated 22 July 2025 had warned the claimant that if he had difficulties attending he must seek a postponement in advance with medical evidence. The claimant did neither.
Decision
Employment Judge James dismissed the claims under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. The judge concluded it was not appropriate to adjourn again in the absence of any explanation for non-attendance or evidence of active pursuit of the claim, and it was not possible to proceed without the claimant being present to clarify his claims.
Practical note
Claimants must actively pursue their claims and attend scheduled hearings; repeated non-attendance without explanation will result in strike-out even at an early procedural stage.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6002421/2025
- Decision date
- 27 November 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Name
- Tank Consult Ltd
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- No
- Rep type
- in house
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No