Case 4101816/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Summers v Secretary of State for Business, Energy & — 2022
- Case reference
- 4101816/2019
- Decision date
- 17 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge GI McPherson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Summers
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Mr C Summers’s 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 identify the underlying substantive cause of action in the reasons section.
The claim had been sisted since 25 March 2019 pending settlement. The tribunal sought an update from the claimant’s representative on 11 February 2022, then again on 24 March 2022 and by reminder on 29 April 2022. The representative said they were still awaiting instructions from the claimant and later withdrew from acting on 13 May 2022.
The tribunal then wrote directly to the claimant on 18 May 2022 asking for an update by 26 May 2022. On 27 May 2022 it gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 10 June 2022 or request a hearing to explain why the claim should not be struck out. No response was received, and the tribunal therefore struck out the claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The extracted judgment does not specify the underlying substantive claim; it records only that the claim was struck out for not being actively pursued under rule 37(1)(d). | 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.