Case 4102967/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Robert Hayes v Bullet Express Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 4102967/2023
- Decision date
- 27 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ian McPherson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Robert Hayes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt with a holiday pay claim brought by Mr Robert Hayes against Bullet Express Ltd. On 17 July 2023, the tribunal asked the claimant to provide further specification of the claim within 14 days, but no reply was received.
The tribunal sent a reminder on 7 August 2023 asking for a response within 7 days, and again received no reply. On 23 August 2023, it gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 6 September 2023, or to request a hearing to explain why the claim should not be struck out.
No response was received to that further letter. The tribunal found that the claimant had failed to give an acceptable reason why judgment should not be made or to request a hearing, and therefore struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) on the basis that it had not been actively pursued. No monetary remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The judgment refers to a claim for holiday pay. It was struck out because it had not been actively pursued under rule 37(1)(d). | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37(1)(d)
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.