Case 4105914/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Case Number: 4105914/2018 & 4114238/2018 Ms L Dickson v Cordia Services LLP Glasgow City Council — 2025
- Case reference
- 4105914/2018
- Decision date
- 28 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Frances Eccles
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Case Number: 4105914/2018 & 4114238/2018 Ms L Dickson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the claims under rule 38 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2024 because they had not been actively pursued.
The claimant's solicitors had withdrawn, and the Tribunal sent a strike out warning letter after the claimant failed to reply to a status enquiry about whether she intended to continue the claims. The correspondence was returned because the claimant no longer lived at the address provided on the ET1, and she had not given the Tribunal a new address.
The Tribunal recorded that, without a current address, it could not communicate with the claimant or give notice under rule 38(2). It assumed in those circumstances that she no longer wished to pursue the claims and struck them out under rule 38(1)(d).
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equal pay | The judgment strikes out the claims for not being actively pursued. The judgment text itself does not describe the underlying equal pay allegations, but the listing category identifies the matter as Equal Pay Act. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 38(1)(d)
- rule 38(2)
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.