Case 3302213/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr IN Regos v Care Concern Group Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3302213/2020
- Decision date
- 13 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hendry
- Venue
- Aberdeen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr IN Regos
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal did not determine the merits of the case. On 26 June 2020 it gave Mr IN Regos until 3 July 2020 either to provide written reasons explaining why the claim should not be struck out or to request a hearing on that issue.
He did not give an acceptable reason and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim on 13 July 2020 under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals Rules, relying on non-compliance with a tribunal order under Rule 37(1)(c) and on the claim not having been actively pursued under Rule 37(1)(d).
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The judgment struck out the claim under Rule 37; it did not make separate merits findings on this head. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment struck out the claim under Rule 37; it did not make separate merits findings on this head. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment struck out the claim under Rule 37; it did not make separate merits findings on this head. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 37(1)(c)
- Rule 37(1)(d)
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.