Case 4102443/2019 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4102443/2019 Miss E Thomson v Glasgow City Council — 2023
- Case reference
- 4102443/2019
- Decision date
- 1 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Frances Eccles
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4102443/2019 Miss E Thomson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant's solicitors had withdrawn from acting for her. After the claimant failed to reply to a Tribunal status enquiry asking her to confirm her intentions for the claim, a strike out warning letter was sent to her on 12 July 2023 on the direction of an Employment Judge.
The correspondence was returned to the Tribunal Office indicating that the claimant no longer lived at the address provided on the ET1. The claimant had not advised the Tribunal of a new address, so the Tribunal could not communicate with her or give notice under rule 37(2).
In those circumstances the Tribunal assumed that the claimant no longer wished to pursue the claim. The claim was struck out under rule 37(1)(d) on the ground that it had not been actively pursued.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equal pay | The judgment struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued. The judgment text does not set out the substantive equal pay allegations; this classification follows the listed case category. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued. The judgment text does not set out the substantive working time allegations; this classification follows the listed case category. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37(1)(d) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- rule 37(2) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 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.