Claim struck out after claimant failed to engage: costs of £3,488 awarded
A former employee who did not attend hearings or respond to a strike-out warning had his unfair dismissal and discrimination claim struck out. The tribunal also ordered him to pay £3,488.40 in costs.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #strike-out
- #costs-order
- #non-attendance
- #unreasonable-conduct
- #cluster-headaches
Key facts
- The claimant presented a claim on 5 July 2022 for unfair dismissal, breach of contract, and disability discrimination.
- The claimant did not attend the case management hearing on 2 December 2022 and did not respond to the strike-out warning.
- The claim was struck out on 25 January 2023 for failure to actively pursue the claim.
- The second respondent applied for costs, which were granted on 5 October 2023 for £3,488.40.
- The claimant applied for reconsideration of both judgments out of time, which was refused.
Timeline
-
Termination notification
The claimant was notified that his employment was to be terminated.
-
Dismissal for gross misconduct
The claimant was dismissed following a disciplinary process.
-
Claim presented
The claimant filed a claim for unfair dismissal, breach of contract, and disability discrimination.
-
Representative withdraws
Stephensons Solicitors confirmed they were not acting for the claimant.
-
Case management hearing
The claimant did not attend; Employment Judge Horne issued a strike-out warning.
-
Strike-out warning sent
The claimant was given 14 days to respond.
-
Strike-out judgment
The claim was struck out for non-engagement.
-
Costs application
The second respondent applied for costs.
-
Costs judgment
The claimant was ordered to pay £3,488.40 in costs.
-
Reconsideration refused
Both reconsideration applications were refused.
The legal issue
Whether the claimant's failure to attend hearings and respond to correspondence amounted to not actively pursuing the claim or unreasonable conduct, justifying a strike-out and costs order.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the claim on 25 January 2023 because the claimant did not attend a case management hearing and failed to respond to a strike-out warning. The second respondent then applied for costs, which were granted on 5 October 2023.
The key reasons were:
- The claimant did not engage with the tribunal after presenting his claim.
- He ignored the strike-out warning and subsequent correspondence.
- The tribunal found his conduct unreasonable, leading to a costs order of £3,488.40.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you bring a claim, you must actively pursue it — attending hearings and responding to tribunal orders is essential.
- Ignoring strike-out warnings will almost certainly result in your claim being dismissed.
- Unreasonable conduct, such as failing to engage, can lead to a costs order against you, even if you are an individual claimant.
- If you lose your legal representative, inform the tribunal promptly and seek alternative representation or advice.
What this case shows in practice
This case demonstrates the importance of engaging with the employment tribunal process once a claim has been issued. The former employee presented claims for unfair dismissal, breach of contract, and disability discrimination but then failed to attend a case management hearing and did not respond to a strike-out warning. The tribunal gave him 14 days to explain why his claim should not be struck out, but he did not reply. As a result, the claim was struck out entirely.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant could have attended the case management hearing or at least responded to the tribunal's warning. Even a brief explanation or a request for more time might have saved the claim. Instead, his silence was taken as a lack of interest in pursuing the case. The tribunal also noted that his solicitor had withdrawn, but he did not seek new representation or contact the tribunal.
Why the result matters for similar claims
Employment tribunals expect claimants to take their cases seriously. Non-attendance and failure to respond to orders are grounds for strike-out. Additionally, the second respondent was awarded costs of £3,488.40 because the claimant's conduct was deemed unreasonable. This shows that costs orders are not just for employers — individuals can be ordered to pay the other side's legal fees if they act unreasonably.
Similar cases
Claim struck out for failing to comply with tribunal orders
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim against Gateshead Health NHS Foundation Trust was struck out after he failed to comply with tribunal orders and did not respond to correspondence. He was ordered to pay £187.50 in costs.
Claims struck out after housing officer failed to serve witness statement
A former housing officer's unfair dismissal and discrimination claims were struck out after she repeatedly failed to serve a witness statement, despite extensions and warnings. She was also ordered to pay £3,870 in costs.
Protected disclosure claim struck out: disclosure made after dismissal cannot save unfair dismissal case
A locum lawyer's claim for automatic unfair dismissal over alleged whistleblowing was struck out because the disclosure came months after his engagement ended. He was also ordered to pay £8,000 in costs for unreasonable conduct.
Costs of £4,490 for bringing a claim with no reasonable prospect of success
A former employee who brought claims of unfair dismissal, disability discrimination and holiday pay arrears has been ordered to pay £4,490 in costs after failing to attend hearings and ignoring a Calderbank offer.