Case 4106372/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Paul Carberry (deceased) v The Glasgow Housing Association Limited — 2018
- Case reference
- 4106372/2017
- Decision date
- 19 November 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shona MacLean
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Paul Carberry (deceased)
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningFollowing the claimant's death in December 2017, Livingstone Brown Solicitors withdrew on 16 August 2018 because they were unable to obtain instructions from the claimant's family. The tribunal then emailed the claimant's daughter to ask whether she wished to continue with the claim, sent a reminder on 12 September 2018, and gave the family until 18 October 2018 to provide written reasons or request a hearing.
No response was received. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim under rule 37 on the ground that it had not been actively pursued within rule 37(1)(d). The judgment records no merits findings and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Mapped from the case listing; the judgment itself refers only to 'the claim' being struck out under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued. No merits were determined. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Mapped from the case listing; the judgment itself refers only to 'the claim' being struck out under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued. No merits were determined. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 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.