Case 4100336/2016 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Chambers v Jaydee Heating Limited (in Administration) — 2017
- Case reference
- 4100336/2016
- Decision date
- 18 April 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge McFatridge
- Venue
- Dundee
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Chambers
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard in Dundee before Employment Judge McFatridge. The judgment records that the claimant was Mr C Chambers and the respondent was Jaydee Heating Limited (in Administration). The tribunal did not determine the merits of any substantive complaint.
On 10 April 2017, the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 17 April 2017 or to request a hearing so that the tribunal could consider why the claim should not be struck out. The claimant did not provide an acceptable reason and did not request a hearing.
The tribunal therefore struck out the claim under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, specifically on the ground that it had not been actively pursued within rule 37(1)(d). No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment strikes out 'the claim' under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued. It does not specify the underlying causes of action in the decision itself. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.