Case 4100905/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr AG Badita v D R Newitt Recruitment — 2019
- Case reference
- 4100905/2019
- Decision date
- 18 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Macleod
- Venue
- Edinburgh
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr AG Badita
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Macleod struck out Mr AG Badita's claim against D R Newitt Recruitment under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The judgment states that the claim had no reasonable prospect of success, that the manner in which the proceedings had been conducted was scandalous, vexatious, disruptive or otherwise unreasonable, and that the claim had not been actively pursued.
The reasons record that on 4 November 2019 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 14 November 2019 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 liability findings or monetary award are recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The extracted judgment does not identify the underlying substantive claim type; it records a strike-out under rule 37 of the 2013 Rules on the grounds in rule 37(1)(a), (b) and (d). | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.