Case 2206261/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Scott v The Royal Parks Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2206261/2022
- Decision date
- 8 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Baty JUDGMENT
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Scott
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy letter dated 3 November 2023, the tribunal gave Mr P Scott 14 days to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out for non-compliance with tribunal orders and because the claim had not been actively pursued. Although the tribunal’s email was not initially copied to the claimant because of an administrative error, the respondent forwarded it to the claimant on 6 November 2023 and also delivered it to his postal address on 7 November 2023, where it was signed for by someone called Scott.
More than 14 days passed after the claimant received the notice, and he did not make written representations or request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim. No substantive merits decision or monetary award is recorded in the judgment, which is dated 8 December 2023 and signed by Employment Judge Baty.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying substantive claim type. It records only that the claim was struck out because the claimant had not complied with tribunal orders and had not actively pursued the claim. | Struck out | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.