Cases4110367/2014

Claimant v Tayside Contracts

9 December 2024Before Employment Judge L WisemanScotlandon papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Otherstruck out

The claim was struck out under rule 37(1)(d) for non-pursuit. Correspondence to the claimant was returned marked 'gone away', no new address was provided, and the claimant's previous agents had withdrawn and held no alternative address.

Facts

The claimant brought a claim in 2014 against Tayside Contracts. The claimant's previous legal representatives withdrew from acting. Correspondence sent to the claimant's address on the claim form was returned marked 'gone away' and no new address was provided. The tribunal concluded the claim was not being actively pursued.

Decision

The tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) on the basis that it had not been actively pursued. The claimant could not be contacted at the address provided and had not updated his contact details despite his representatives withdrawing.

Practical note

A claim will be struck out for non-pursuit where the claimant becomes uncontactable and fails to provide updated contact details, even where they were previously represented.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

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

Case details

Case number
4110367/2014
Decision date
9 December 2024
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
public sector
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No