Case 4106818/2014 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Carden v Geopost UK Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 4106818/2014
- Decision date
- 19 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Robert Gall
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Carden
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 22 December 2020, the tribunal gave Mr P Carden an opportunity to provide written reasons by 12 January 2021, or to request a hearing, to explain why the claim should not be struck out. The judgment records that he did not give an acceptable reason and did not request a hearing.
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) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure. The judgment does not contain any merits findings on the underlying complaints and no remedy was awarded. The judgment was signed on 18 January 2021 and issued to the parties on 19 January 2021.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Underlying complaint type is taken from the case listing; the judgment itself only records that 'the claim' was struck out for not being actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Underlying complaint type is taken from the case listing; the judgment itself only records that 'the claim' was struck out for not being actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.