Cases111113/2009

Claimant v Glasgow City Council

10 January 2025Before Employment Judge F EcclesScotlandon papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Otherstruck out

Claim struck out under rule 37(1)(d) for non-pursuit. The claimant was given until 29 August 2024 to provide written reasons or request a hearing to explain why the claim should not be struck out but failed to respond or provide an acceptable reason.

Facts

Ms L Duncan brought a claim against Glasgow City Council and Cordia (Services) LLP in 2009. By August 2024, the Tribunal was considering striking out the claim for non-pursuit. The claimant was given until 29 August 2024 to provide reasons why the claim should not be struck out or to request a hearing but failed to respond or provide an acceptable reason.

Decision

The Tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) on the grounds that it had not been actively pursued. The claimant failed to engage with the Tribunal's order to show cause why the claim should continue, providing no response or acceptable reason for the lack of pursuit.

Practical note

A claimant who fails to actively pursue their claim and does not respond to a tribunal's unless order faces strike out, even where the claim was originally filed many years earlier.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

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

Case details

Case number
111113/2009
Decision date
10 January 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Name
Glasgow City Council
Sector
local government
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No