Case 4104321/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr O Beesley v No appearance Carbon Zero Business Services Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 4104321/2022
- Decision date
- 21 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Jones
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr O Beesley
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr O Beesley presented a claim in respect of unpaid wages on 1 August 2022. The respondent did not submit a valid response. At a preliminary hearing on 30 September 2022, the claimant was ordered to provide a detailed breakdown of the sums sought and copies of supporting evidence by 21 October 2022.
The tribunal later warned the claimant by letter dated 28 November 2022 that strike-out was being considered because of non-compliance with the order. Although the claimant subsequently emailed information about the sums sought and documentary evidence on 24 January 2023, the tribunal then fixed a hearing to consider strike-out and sent notice that a final hearing would follow if the claim was not struck out.
Neither party attended the hearing on 17 March 2023. No application for postponement was made. The clerk attempted to contact the claimant by telephone without success, and the claimant did not respond to a voicemail message left after the hearing was due to start. The tribunal said it was not clear why he did not attend.
Applying Rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, Schedule 1, the tribunal struck out the claim on the basis that the claimant had failed actively to pursue it. The tribunal relied on the claimant's failure to give a reason for non-attendance or seek postponement, together with his earlier failure to comply timeously with the tribunal's order.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes the case as a claim in respect of unpaid wages. It does not record any substantive determination of liability; the claim was struck out for failure to actively pursue it under Rule 37(1)(d). | 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.