Case 4104838/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Sharkie v Scottish Fire and Rescue Service — 2021
- Case reference
- 4104838/2020
- Decision date
- 26 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Whitcombe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Sharkie
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge M Whitcombe struck out Ms J Sharkie's claim under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 on the basis that it had not been actively pursued. The reasons state that she failed to attend a hearing on 16 November 2020 and did not engage with tribunal correspondence after that date.
On 15 January 2021 the tribunal gave Ms Sharkie until 29 January 2021 to provide written reasons why the claim should not be struck out or to request a hearing. The tribunal found that she did not give an acceptable reason and did not request a hearing, so the claim was struck out. No merits findings or monetary remedy were made, and the judgment was entered in the register on 26 March 2021.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment itself only records that the claim was struck out under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued; the substantive heads are taken from the case context and are not separated in the extracted text. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment itself only records that the claim was struck out under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued; the substantive heads are taken from the case context and are not separated in the extracted text. | Struck out | Disability | — |
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.