Claimant v Chalmers West Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The claim was struck out under rule 38(1)(d) for failure to actively pursue. The claimant failed to provide further and better particulars as ordered, failed to attend a preliminary hearing, and failed to provide medical evidence as ordered despite multiple reminders and a strike-out warning.
Facts
The claimant E Robertson brought proceedings against Chalmers West Ltd. At a preliminary hearing on 17 March 2025, she was ordered to provide further and better particulars of her claims within 28 days but failed to do so. She also failed to respond to a reminder sent on 9 May 2025. At a second preliminary hearing on 28 May 2025, the claimant did not attend, later emailing to say she was unwell. She was ordered to provide medical evidence within 7 days but failed to do so despite reminders and a strike-out warning on 11 July 2025.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the claim under rule 38(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 on the grounds that it had not been actively pursued. The claimant repeatedly failed to comply with tribunal orders, failed to attend hearings, and failed to respond to reminders and strike-out warnings.
Practical note
Claimants must actively pursue their claims by complying with tribunal orders and attending hearings, or risk having their claims struck out for non-pursuit under rule 38(1)(d).
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 8002223/2024
- Decision date
- 21 August 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No