The details of this case are not known - the respondent refused to take part in proceedings and an award was made upon hearing the claimant's uncontested evidence. What is interesting is the lengths to which the EAT went to accommodate a seemingly quite vexatious respondent (both he and the claimant were unrepresented). Not only did the EAT grant an adjournment in July because the respondent said then that he had not had notice of the UD element of the appeal, but the respondent tried all manner of things to get out of the case on the rearranged date last October.

The EAT was conscious of its requirement of audi alterem parte i.e. to also hear the other side, quite a difficult task when the respondent left the hearing, citing illness that affected only the unfair dismissal element of the appeal. However, the respondent had been given an opportunity to attend and one tribunal responsibility had to be balanced against the principle of “justice delayed is justice denied”, so the EAT proceeded to hear the case whilst the respondent opened the door of the hearing room and again stated that he was too ill.