Whistleblowing claim struck out after claimant fails to attend hearings
A former employee's unfair dismissal and whistleblowing claims were dismissed after she failed to attend two hearings, including a telephone hearing where neither party showed up.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Key facts
- The claimant started employment on 5 April 2021 and was dismissed after about two weeks.
- The claimant was off sick for 4 days before dismissal.
- The claimant alleged she made protected disclosures about health and safety issues to the respondent and Waverly Borough Council.
- The claimant did not attend the preliminary hearing on 12 August 2022 or the telephone hearing on 18 January 2023.
- The respondent also did not attend the telephone hearing on 18 January 2023.
- The tribunal dismissed the claim under rule 47 for not being actively pursued.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant commenced employment with the respondent.
-
Claimant off sick
Two weeks into the role, the claimant was off sick.
-
Claimant returned and dismissed
Claimant returned to work after 4 days and was dismissed by the respondent.
-
First preliminary hearing
Claimant did not attend the in-person hearing; tribunal considered striking out the claim.
-
Claimant responded to strike-out proposal
Claimant wrote to the tribunal explaining she had made an error about the date.
-
Respondent requested postponement
Respondent emailed tribunal asking for postponement of the hearing; request refused.
-
Telephone hearing and dismissal
Neither party attended the telephone hearing; tribunal dismissed the claim under rule 47.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether to strike out the claim because the claimant had not been actively pursuing it, given her non-attendance at hearings and lack of communication.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim in its entirety. The key reason was that the claimant did not attend the scheduled telephone hearing and had previously missed an in-person preliminary hearing. Despite being given a chance to explain her earlier absence, she provided no reason for missing the telephone hearing. The respondent also failed to attend, but the tribunal focused on the claimant's lack of active pursuit. No compensation was awarded as the claim was struck out.
Lessons & takeaways
- Always attend scheduled hearings or request a postponement well in advance with a valid reason.
- If you miss a hearing, provide a clear explanation promptly to avoid the claim being struck out.
- Keep the tribunal updated with your correct contact details and respond to all communications.
- Whistleblowing claims require the same procedural diligence as any other claim; non-attendance can be fatal.
This case shows how quickly an employment claim can unravel if the claimant fails to engage with the tribunal process. The former employee alleged she was dismissed after raising health and safety concerns with her employer and the local council, which would normally be a strong whistleblowing claim. However, her case was struck out before it could be heard on its merits.
What went wrong
The claimant missed two hearings. The first was an in-person preliminary hearing in August 2022, which she said was due to a diary error. The tribunal gave her a second chance and listed a telephone hearing for January 2023. She was told the hearing would be by phone and was asked to provide a contact number. Her employer emailed on the eve of the hearing asking for a postponement, but gave no proper reason, so the tribunal refused. On the day, neither party answered when the judge called them. The tribunal decided the claim was not being actively pursued and dismissed it under rule 47.
Why this matters
Tribunals have wide powers to strike out claims that are not prosecuted diligently. Even a potentially strong case — such as one involving protected disclosures — can be lost if the claimant does not attend hearings or keep in touch. The rules are designed to ensure cases are dealt with efficiently, and claimants are expected to take reasonable steps to progress their claim. Missing one hearing might be forgiven with a good explanation, but missing two without any communication is likely to be fatal.
What could have been done differently
The claimant could have attended the telephone hearing or, if unable to, provided a clear reason and requested a postponement in advance. She could also have responded to the tribunal's earlier order to show cause why the claim should not be struck out. The respondent too could have attended or provided a proper postponement request. In the end, neither party participated, and the claim was dismissed without any consideration of the whistleblowing allegations.
Similar cases
Former employee's claims dismissed after failing to attend final hearing
An employment tribunal dismissed all remaining claims of a former employee who did not attend the final hearing and failed to comply with court orders, ending a case that had already lost several claims due to non-compliance.
Board-level health and safety director's whistleblowing claim survives strike-out attempt
A tribunal has refused to strike out a whistleblowing claim brought by a board-level health and safety director who alleged he was suspended and denied a bonus after raising concerns about storm risks.
Claim dismissed after former employee fails to attend final hearing
An employment tribunal dismissed an unfair dismissal claim after the former employee failed to attend the final hearing and made a last-minute adjournment request with no prior notice.
Claim dismissed after former employee fails to attend third final hearing
An employment tribunal dismissed a former employee's unfair dismissal claim after he failed to attend the final hearing for the third time and had not engaged with the claim for over a year.