Case 4100338/2016 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Brander v Jaydee Heating Limited (in Administration) — 2017
- Case reference
- 4100338/2016
- Decision date
- 18 April 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge McFatridge
- Venue
- Dundee
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Brander
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis judgment is a procedural disposal only. The Employment Tribunal for Scotland, sitting in Dundee before Employment Judge McFatridge, considered case 4100338/2016 on 18 April 2017 and struck out the claim under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
The reason given was that the claim had not been actively pursued within rule 37(1)(d). On 10 April 2017 the tribunal had given the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 17 April 2017, or to request a hearing to explain why the claim should not be struck out.
The claimant did not give an acceptable reason and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim. The judgment records no findings on the substance of the pleaded employment claims and no monetary remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not determine the underlying merits of the pleaded claims. It strikes out the case under rule 37(1)(d) because it had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.