Case 4101695/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Winmill v H R M Homecare Services Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 4101695/2022
- Decision date
- 16 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Maclean
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Winmill
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing for case management on 30 May 2022, Employment Judge S Maclean issued a Note on 31 May 2022 directing the claimant to provide specification of the claims he had brought within 28 days. The claimant did not respond to that order.
The Tribunal then wrote to the claimant on 29 June 2022 reminding him to comply, and on 19 July 2022 gave him an opportunity to provide written reasons by 3 August 2022 or to request a hearing to explain why the claim should not be struck out. No reply was received to either communication.
The Tribunal found that the claimant had failed to give an acceptable reason why judgment should not be made and had not requested a hearing. It therefore struck out the claim under rule 37 on the ground of non-compliance with an order of the Tribunal, specifically rule 37(1)(c). No merits determination or monetary remedy was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The decision text does not specify the underlying pleaded claim type; the case listing categorised it as unfair dismissal. The Tribunal struck out the claim for non-compliance with an order of the Tribunal. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37(1)(c)
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.