Case 4104906/2013 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Wright v Respondent — 2018
- Case reference
- 4104906/2013
- Decision date
- 13 July 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Frances Eccles
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr D Wright
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal held that Mr D Wright's claim against East Dunbartonshire Council should be struck out under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 because it had not been actively pursued. On 27 June 2018 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 4 July 2018, or to request a hearing so that the question of strike out could be considered.
The claimant did not give an acceptable reason why the claim should not be struck out and did not request a hearing. In those circumstances, Employment Judge Frances Eccles struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(d). The judgment records no substantive determination of liability and no monetary remedy.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equal pay | Struck out under rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules because the claim had not been actively pursued. On 27 June 2018 the Tribunal gave the claimant until 4 July 2018 to provide written reasons or request a hearing, but no acceptable reason was given and no hearing was requested. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.