Claimant v Hermes Parcelnet Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim struck out under Rule 47 for non-attendance at preliminary hearing. The claimant failed to attend the hearing on 21 February 2025 despite previously failing to attend on 8 August 2024 and repeatedly failing to comply with case management orders. The tribunal found the claimant had manifestly failed to prosecute the case.
Facts
The claimant filed a disability discrimination claim in April 2024 following his engagement ending in February 2024. He failed to comply with case management orders including providing a schedule of loss and document lists. He failed to attend a preliminary hearing on 8 August 2024 without explanation (later provided evidence he was in hospital). He then failed to attend a second preliminary hearing on 21 February 2025, claiming he struggled to join the telephone hearing, though the judge found this explanation not credible.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the claim under Rule 47 for failure to attend the hearing. The judge found the claimant had manifestly failed to prosecute his case over a 10-month period, had twice caused the respondent to incur costs by attending hearings he did not attend, and had provided an unconvincing explanation for his non-attendance. The claimant was given the opportunity to apply for reconsideration.
Practical note
Persistent failure to attend hearings and comply with case management orders can result in strike-out under Rule 47, even where a claimant provides explanations for non-attendance if the tribunal finds the pattern of conduct demonstrates deliberate failure to prosecute.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2600593/2024
- Decision date
- 21 February 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- logistics
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No