Cases2301926/2022

Claimant v John Lewis Plc

26 November 2025Before Employment Judge D WrightCroydonremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Otherstruck out

The claim was struck out due to the claimant's non-attendance at the preliminary hearing and unreasonable conduct. The claimant failed to agree a hearing bundle for over a year, did not comply with tribunal orders, and failed to actively pursue the claim by engaging in necessary preparation for the final hearing. The tribunal found that a fair hearing was no longer possible given the lack of progress and the claimant's failure to cooperate.

Facts

The claimant filed a claim in June 2022. A final hearing was listed for June 2024 with over a year's notice, but was postponed at the claimant's request due to surgery. The hearing was relisted for December 2025. The claimant failed to engage in agreeing a hearing bundle for over a year, leading to a respondent strike-out application in October 2025. An urgent preliminary hearing was listed for 26 November 2025 to ensure readiness for the December hearing. Despite the hearing being re-timed to accommodate his hospital appointment, the claimant did not attend, citing medical unfitness based on a fit note relating to obstructive sleep apnoea.

Decision

The tribunal struck out the claim on three grounds: (1) under Rule 47 for the claimant's non-attendance without good reason, (2) under Rule 38(b) for unreasonable conduct in failing to agree a bundle and comply with tribunal orders making a fair trial impossible, and (3) under Rule 38(d) for failing to actively pursue the claim. The tribunal found the claimant had wilfully disregarded orders and there was no prospect of the December 2025 hearing proceeding fairly.

Practical note

Persistent failure to comply with case management orders, particularly refusal to agree a hearing bundle, combined with non-attendance at a preparatory hearing, will lead to strike-out even where a claimant has otherwise engaged with some aspects of proceedings.

Legal authorities cited

Blockbuster Entertainment Ltd v James [2006] EWCA Civ 684Emuemukoro v Croma Vigilant (Scotland) Ltd [2022] ICR 327Arrow Nominees Inc v Blackledge [2000] 2 BCLC 167Smith v Tesco Stores Limited [2023] EAT 11Bolch

Statutes

Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure - Rule 3Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure - Rule 38Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure - Rule 47

Case details

Case number
2301926/2022
Decision date
26 November 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
0.25
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
retail
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No