Case 4105524/2015 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Beaton v Unrepresented North Lanarkshire Council — 2018
- Case reference
- 4105524/2015
- Decision date
- 16 April 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Frances Eccles
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Beaton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 12 March 2018 the tribunal gave Mrs L Beaton an opportunity to provide written reasons by 19 March 2018, or to request a hearing to explain why the claim should not be struck out. The respondent was North Lanarkshire Council, represented by Ms M Lithgow, solicitor, and the claimant was unrepresented.
The claimant did not give an acceptable reason why a strike out should not be made and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 on the ground that the claim had not been actively pursued within rule 37(1)(d).
No substantive liability findings or remedy award were made. The judgment was entered on 16 April 2018 by Employment Judge Frances Eccles.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equal pay | The judgment does not identify the substantive claim in the short text extracted, but the case metadata lists Equal Pay Act and the claim was struck out under rule 37 for not being actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37(1)(d) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.