Case 4102522/2015 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Busby v The Glasgow Housing Association Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 4102522/2015
- Decision date
- 29 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Robert Gall
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Busby
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 29 October 2019 the Tribunal gave Mr Busby an opportunity to provide written reasons by 12 November 2019, or to request a hearing, to address why the claim should not be struck out. The judgment records that he did not provide an acceptable reason and did not request a hearing.
The Tribunal therefore struck the claim out under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 on the basis that it had not been actively pursued within rule 37(1)(d). The judgment does not include any merits findings or any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The extracted judgment does not state the substantive heads of claim; this classification is taken from the gov.uk case listing, which identifies unlawful deduction from wages as one of the categories for this case. The judgment itself only records that 'the claim' was struck out under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The extracted judgment does not state the substantive heads of claim; this classification is taken from the gov.uk case listing, which identifies working time as one of the categories for this case. The judgment itself only records that 'the claim' was struck out under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- 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.