Case 4100889/2012 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Smith v Respondent — 2018
- Case reference
- 4100889/2012
- Decision date
- 31 October 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Frances Eccles
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Ms M Smith
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a short judgment by Employment Judge Frances Eccles sitting in Glasgow. The tribunal recorded that the claim was struck out 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 reasons explain that on 27 September 2018 the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 4 October 2018, or to request a hearing to consider why the claim should not be struck out. The claimant did not give an acceptable reason and did not request a hearing.
On that basis, the tribunal struck out the claim. No substantive findings on the merits of the underlying equal pay dispute and no monetary award were recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equal pay | The judgment states only that the claim was struck out under rule 37 on the ground that it had not been actively pursued. The underlying equal pay issue is taken from the case listing category. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.