Case 4102268/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Pattenden v EBS Systems Limited (In administration) — 2021
- Case reference
- 4102268/2020
- Decision date
- 9 December 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Whitcombe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Pattenden
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal for Scotland, sitting with Employment Judge M Whitcombe, struck out Mr C Pattenden's claim against EBS Systems Ltd (in administration) under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The judgment records that on 8 June 2020 the tribunal told the claimant that, because the respondent was in administration, the administrator's consent was required for the claim to proceed, and the case was sisted to allow time to obtain that consent.
The tribunal then wrote on 10 December 2020 asking for an update on whether consent had been obtained, and sent a reminder on 4 August 2021 asking the claimant to confirm whether consent for the claim to proceed had been given. On 6 September 2021 the claimant was given an opportunity to provide written reasons by 20 September 2021, or to request a hearing, on why the claim should not be struck out.
The claimant did not provide an acceptable reason or request a hearing. On that basis, the tribunal held that the claim had not been actively pursued within rule 37(1)(d) and struck it out. The judgment does not record any substantive determination of the underlying merits or any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not determine the merits of any substantive claim. It states that the claim was struck out under rule 37 because it had not been actively pursued, following correspondence about whether administrator consent had been obtained. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- rule 37(1)(d)
- not actively pursued
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.