Case 4100318/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Number: 4100318/2025 Mrs C Hall v Scott Bros Motor Engineers Limited (Compulsory Liquidation) — 2026
- Case reference
- 4100318/2025
- Decision date
- 21 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Wiseman Case
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Number: 4100318/2025 Mrs C Hall
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the claim under rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 on the ground that it had not been actively pursued in terms of rule 38(1)(d). The judgment does not identify the underlying claim type or record any adjudication on the merits of breach of contract, redundancy pay, unlawful deduction from wages, or any other substantive cause of action.
The reasons record that on 26 March 2026 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 9 April 2026, or to request a hearing, to explain why the claim should not be struck out. The claimant failed to give an acceptable reason why strike-out judgment should not be made and did not request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim. No remedy or monetary award was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment states that the claim was struck out under rule 38(1)(d) because it had not been actively pursued, but it does not identify the underlying cause or causes of action. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- rule 38(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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.