Case 4106501/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Henderson v Altrad Employment Services Ltd T/A Altrad Services — 2023
- Case reference
- 4106501/2022
- Decision date
- 5 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge P O'Donnell
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Henderson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 23 January 2023, the claimant was ordered to provide further specification of the claim and a preliminary schedule of loss within 28 days. At a further preliminary hearing on 28 March 2023, the Employment Judge recorded that the claimant had not provided the information ordered and had not given a satisfactory explanation for the failure. The claimant was given a further 7 days to comply, but no response was received.
On 14 April 2023 the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 21 April 2023 or to request a hearing to explain why the claim should not be struck out. No written reasons were provided and no hearing was requested. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, on the grounds of non-compliance with an order of the tribunal under rule 37(1)(c) and that the claim had not been actively pursued under rule 37(1)(d).
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not specify the underlying substantive claim types in the text provided. The tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(c) for non-compliance with an order and rule 37(1)(d) because the claim had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37(1)(c) Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- rule 37(1)(d) 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.