Cases6008706/2024

Claimant v MHS Homes Ltd

3 July 2025Before Employment Judge TsamadosLondon Southremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

The claim was dismissed under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 after the claimant failed to attend the final hearing. The claimant had sought postponement for medical reasons (cataract surgery) but provided insufficient medical evidence and the tribunal found he had unilaterally absented himself without acceptable reasons.

Facts

The claimant brought an unfair dismissal claim against his former employer, MHS Homes Ltd. A two-day final hearing was scheduled for 3-4 July 2025. The claimant repeatedly sought postponements citing upcoming cataract surgery and eye-related issues. His applications were refused by Employment Judges on multiple occasions due to lack of sufficient medical evidence. On the day of the hearing, the claimant failed to attend, claiming he was awaiting consideration of a further postponement application made on 27 June 2025.

Decision

Employment Judge Tsamados dismissed the claim under rule 47 after the claimant failed to attend the hearing. The judge refused the claimant's last-minute postponement request, noting that the pre-operative assessment was not until 21 July, the actual surgery date was not set, and the 9am telephone assessment on the hearing day would have been completed by the scheduled 10am start. The judge concluded the claimant had unilaterally absented himself without acceptable reasons.

Practical note

Claimants seeking postponement for medical reasons must provide robust medical evidence and make applications in a timely manner; unilateral non-attendance based on pending postponement requests carries significant risk of strike-out under rule 47.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 rule 47

Case details

Case number
6008706/2024
Decision date
3 July 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
real estate
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No