Cases114891/2009

Claimant v Glasgow City Council

14 January 2025Before Employment Judge F EcclesScotlandon papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Otherstruck out

The claim was struck out under rule 37(1)(d) because it had not been actively pursued. The claimant was given until 26 September 2024 to provide written reasons or request a hearing but failed to give an acceptable reason why the claim should not be struck out or to request a hearing.

Facts

Miss McGinty brought a claim in 2009 against Glasgow City Council and Cordia (Services) LLP. The nature of the original claim is not specified in this judgment. On 12 September 2024, the tribunal gave the claimant until 26 September 2024 to provide written reasons why the claim should not be struck out or to request a hearing. The claimant failed to respond adequately to this unless order.

Decision

The tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) on the grounds that it had not been actively pursued. The claimant was given a final opportunity to explain why the claim should not be struck out but failed to give an acceptable reason or request a hearing, leading to the claim being dismissed.

Practical note

Claimants must actively pursue their claims and respond to tribunal orders, or risk having their claims struck out for non-pursuit even after many years.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 Schedule 1 rule 37Rule 37(1)(d)

Case details

Case number
114891/2009
Decision date
14 January 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Name
Glasgow City Council
Sector
local government
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No