Case 4104173/2023 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4104173/2023 Miss S Sathyan v Tayside Bar & Kitchen Perth Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 4104173/2023
- Decision date
- 10 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge I McFatridge Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4104173/2023 Miss S Sathyan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 9 November 2023 Employment Judge I McFatridge struck out the claim under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, relying on rule 37(1)(d) on the basis that the claim had not been actively pursued. The judgment records that the claimant was Miss S Sathyan and the respondent was Tayside Bar & Kitchen Perth Ltd.
The tribunal explained that, by letter dated 11 October 2023, the claimant was given an opportunity to provide written reasons by 25 October 2023 or to request a hearing so that the tribunal could consider why the claim should not be struck out. No response was received. The tribunal found that the claimant had failed to respond or give reasons why a strike-out judgment should not be made, and it therefore struck out the claim. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The extracted judgment does not specify the substantive claim type. It states that the claim was struck out under rule 37(1)(d) because it had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 37
- rule 37(1)(d)
- 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.