Cases6014094/2024

Claimant v Kids 1st Steps Limited

13 January 2025Before Employment Judge Cowxon papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unlawful Deduction from Wagesdismissed on withdrawal

Claim dismissed under Rule 47 for non-attendance of claimant at hearing. Claimant failed to join the video hearing despite proper notification by letter on 17 October 2024 and email containing video link. Tribunal found on balance of probabilities that claimant was aware of hearing date and time.

Holiday Paydismissed on withdrawal

Claim dismissed under Rule 47 for non-attendance of claimant at hearing scheduled for 13 January 2025. Despite tribunal efforts to contact claimant by telephone and email on the day, no response was received. Judge determined it was not proportionate to adjourn and allocate further tribunal time.

Breach of Contractdismissed on withdrawal

Claim dismissed under Rule 47 for non-attendance at hearing. Claimant claimed she did not receive notification and could not access mobile phone at work, but tribunal rejected this explanation. Reconsideration application refused as there was no reasonable prospect of varying the dismissal decision.

Facts

The claimant brought claims for unpaid wages (£2,324.78), holiday pay and notice pay after her employment ended when the respondent ceased trading. She was notified of a video hearing on 13 January 2025 by letter dated 17 October 2024 and subsequent email. The claimant did not attend the hearing, and the tribunal was unable to contact her despite telephone and email attempts. The claims were dismissed under Rule 47 for non-attendance. The claimant applied for reconsideration, claiming she had not received notification and could not access her mobile phone at work.

Decision

The tribunal refused the reconsideration application on preliminary consideration under Rule 72(1). Employment Judge Cowx found on the balance of probabilities that the claimant had received proper notification of the hearing through two different means of communication. The judge determined there was no reasonable prospect of varying the dismissal decision and that it would not be proportionate to allocate further tribunal time to the matter.

Practical note

Tribunals will strictly enforce notification requirements and apply principles of finality and proportionality when considering reconsideration applications for non-attendance, particularly in lower-value claims where the respondent has ceased trading.

Legal authorities cited

Flint v Eastern Electricity Board [1975] ICR 395Ebury Partners UK Limited v David [2023] EAT 40Liddington v 2Gether NHS Foundation Trust EAT/0002/16Lindsay v Ironsides Ray and Vials [1994] ICR 384Ministry of Justice v Burton [2016] EWCA Civ 714

Statutes

Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 Rule 2Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 Rule 72(1)Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 Rule 70Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 Rule 47

Case details

Case number
6014094/2024
Decision date
13 January 2025
Hearing type
reconsideration
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
education
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No