Case 4104849/2022 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4104849/2022 Mr C Stewart Angus Inns Ltd v Represented by: In Person — 2023
- Case reference
- 4104849/2022
- Decision date
- 23 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4104849/2022 Mr C Stewart Angus Inns Ltd
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 23 January 2023, the Employment Tribunal for Scotland struck out Mr C Stewart's claim against Angus Inns Ltd under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The tribunal relied on rule 37(1)(d), finding that the claim had not been actively pursued.
The reasons record that on 9 January 2023 the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 16 January 2023, or to request a hearing to explain why the claim should not be struck out. The claimant did not provide an acceptable reason and did not request a hearing, so the tribunal struck out the claim. No substantive merits findings or remedy award were made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) on the basis that it had not been actively pursued. The judgment does not determine the underlying substantive claim(s) on the merits. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.