Cases114072/2009

Claimant v Glasgow City Council

6 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's solicitors withdrew from acting, correspondence was returned undelivered as the claimant no longer resided at the address provided, and the claimant failed to advise the Tribunal of her new address. The Tribunal concluded she no longer wished to pursue her claim.

Facts

Ms Cameron brought a claim against Glasgow City Council and Cordia (Services) LLP in 2009. Her solicitors withdrew from acting on her behalf. The Tribunal sent correspondence to her on 25 July 2024 asking for confirmation of her intention to continue, but this was returned undelivered as she no longer resided at the address provided on her ET1. She did not update the Tribunal with her new contact details.

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 maintain contact with the Tribunal after her solicitors withdrew, and the Tribunal was unable to communicate with her. The Tribunal assumed she no longer wished to pursue her claim.

Practical note

Claimants must keep the Tribunal informed of their current address and maintain active pursuit of their claims, or risk having them struck out for non-pursuit, particularly after loss of legal representation.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, Schedule 1, Rule 37(1)(d)Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, Schedule 1, Rule 37(2)

Case details

Case number
114072/2009
Decision date
6 January 2025
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Name
Glasgow City Council
Sector
local government
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No