Case 4101010/2016 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Docherty v Motherwell Bridge Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 4101010/2016
- Decision date
- 20 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wiseman
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Docherty
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 19 June 2019, Employment Judge Wiseman gave Mr G Docherty an opportunity to provide written reasons by 3 July 2019, or to request a hearing, to explain why the claim should not be struck out. The tribunal recorded that the claimant did not give an acceptable reason and did not request a hearing.
The judgment therefore 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 set out any substantive findings on the underlying merits of the claim, and no remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Working time regulations | The judgment does not identify the substantive pleaded cause of action. The case is treated as a working time matter from the gov.uk listing category, but the tribunal only recorded strike-out under rule 37(1)(d) for failure to actively pursue the claim. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.