Claimant v Perfect Care Limited

Outcome

Facts

The claimant was a care assistant employed for just over two years who was dismissed for alleged gross misconduct relating to failure to apply a pain relief patch for 24 hours. She brought an unfair dismissal claim but provided minimal particulars in her ET1 and failed to comply with orders to provide a witness statement. At the full merits hearing, she and her lay representative joined briefly by video, were asked about the missing witness statement, then disconnected and did not return despite multiple attempts by the tribunal to make contact. The respondent applied to strike out the claim.

Decision

The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim under Rules 38(1)(b), (c) and (e) on the grounds that the claimant had conducted proceedings unreasonably, failed to comply with tribunal orders, and it was no longer possible to have a fair hearing in the hearing window. The judge found the claimant had deliberately absented herself after a difficult question and that postponement would be unduly prejudicial to the respondent whose key witness was no longer employed and due to commence maternity leave.

Practical note

Legal authorities cited