Case 4100698/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss N Rule v Respondent — 2019
- Case reference
- 4100698/2019
- Decision date
- 31 May 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Gall
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Miss N Rule
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that Miss N Rule did not appear and was not represented at the preliminary hearing on 17 April 2019, and there was no contact or explanation for that failure. The Tribunal then gave her until 1 May 2019 to provide written reasons or request a hearing so it could consider why the claim should not be struck out.
No acceptable reason was provided, and no hearing was requested. On that basis, Employment Judge R Gall struck out the claim under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 on the ground that it had not been actively pursued within rule 37(1)(d). The judgment does not record any merits findings or any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment does not determine the merits of the disability discrimination claim; it strikes out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment does not determine the merits of the unfair dismissal claim; it strikes out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37(1)(d)
- rule 37
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.