Cases4110389/2014

Claimant v Tayside Contracts

9 January 2025Before Employment Judge L WisemanScotlandon papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Otherstruck out

Claim struck out under rule 37(1)(d) for failure to actively pursue. Claimant failed to respond to tribunal order dated 2 December 2024 requiring written reasons or request for hearing by 16 December 2024.

Facts

The claimant Mr F MacDonald brought a claim against Tayside Contracts. The tribunal issued an order on 2 December 2024 requiring the claimant to provide written reasons by 16 December 2024 why the claim should not be struck out, or to request a hearing. The claimant failed to comply with this 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 failed to provide an acceptable reason or request a hearing as required by the tribunal's order.

Practical note

Failure to respond to tribunal orders requiring reasons why a claim should not be struck out will result in the claim being dismissed for non-pursuit, even in the absence of a substantive hearing.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

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

Case details

Case number
4110389/2014
Decision date
9 January 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
public sector
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No