Cases3202136/2024

Claimant v FR Shadbold and Sons Limited

10 September 2025Before Employment Judge MoorLondon Eastin person

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Breach of Contractstruck out

Claim dismissed under Rule 47 due to claimant's non-attendance at hearing. Claimant was at work and had not applied for postponement. Additionally, claim was out of time under ET Extension of Jurisdiction Order 1994 and tribunal needed to hear evidence on delay.

Facts

Two claimants brought claims against their former employer which was in voluntary liquidation. Neither claimant attended the hearing scheduled for 10 September 2025. One was at work and one was on holiday. No application for postponement was made. Other claimants in related cases confirmed both were aware of the hearing date.

Decision

Employment Judge Moor dismissed both claims under Rule 47 for non-attendance. The tribunal was satisfied both parties had been notified. The judge found the reasons for absence insufficient and that it was in accordance with the overriding objective to dismiss as the parties had not taken their opportunity to be heard.

Practical note

Claimants must attend scheduled hearings or apply for postponement with good reason; failure to do so will result in dismissal of claims even against an insolvent respondent.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024 Rule 47Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024 Rule 2Employment Tribunals (Extension of Jurisdiction) Order 1994

Case details

Case number
3202136/2024
Decision date
10 September 2025
Hearing type
dismissal on withdrawal
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
other
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No