Case 4102792/2014 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Bertram v Respondent — 2018
- Case reference
- 4102792/2014
- Decision date
- 30 October 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Frances Eccles
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mrs J Bertram
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt with a claim brought by Mrs J Bertram against North Ayrshire Council. On 27 September 2018, Employment Judge Frances Eccles gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 4 October 2018, or to request a hearing to consider why the claim should not be struck out.
The claimant did not give an acceptable reason why a judgment should not be made and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 on the basis that the claim had not been actively pursued.
No remedy was awarded, and the judgment records only the procedural strike-out. The decision is dated 30 October 2018.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equal pay | Claim struck out under rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 because it had not been actively pursued. The tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity on 27 September 2018 to provide written reasons by 4 October 2018 or request a hearing, but no acceptable reason or hearing request was provided. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37(1)(d) 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.