Former employee's claim struck out after failing to comply with tribunal orders

A case that ended before it began

This case shows how failing to follow tribunal procedures can derail a claim entirely, regardless of its merits. The former employee brought an unfair dismissal claim against Navaratna South Indian Restaurant Ltd., but the claim never reached a full hearing.

The tribunal issued case management orders in April 2023, requiring the claimant to file and serve various documents. She did not comply. When a preliminary hearing was listed for November 2023, her representative emailed the tribunal two days before, saying she had Covid, but attached no medical evidence. The claimant did not attend, and the tribunal struck out the claim.

What the tribunal considered

The tribunal applied Rule 37(1)(c) and (d) of the Employment Tribunal Rules. It found that the claimant had not complied with tribunal orders and had not actively pursued the claim. Even if the Covid email had been considered, the tribunal said the strike-out under Rule 37(1)(c) would still stand because of the earlier non-compliance.

The respondent had also indicated that the claimant had told them she was no longer pursuing the claim, which further supported the strike-out.

What this means for similar claims

Employment tribunals expect parties to follow directions and engage with the process. Missing deadlines or failing to provide evidence for absence can be fatal. Claimants who are representing themselves should be particularly careful to keep track of orders and seek help if needed. This case is a reminder that procedural compliance is not optional — it is essential to getting a hearing on the facts.