Case 4107302/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Heaney v Project People Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 4107302/2022
- Decision date
- 17 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge D Hoey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Heaney
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Miss C Heaney's claim under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 on the ground that it had not been actively pursued within rule 37(1)(d). The judgment does not decide the substance of the underlying claim; it deals only with case management and strike-out.
The tribunal recorded that on 28 February 2023 it wrote to the claimant asking her to confirm which elements of the claim she was pursuing, including any application to amend the claim. No reply was received. On 20 March 2023 the tribunal gave her an opportunity to provide written reasons by 3 April 2023, or to request a hearing to explain why the claim should not be struck out. Again, no reply was received.
The tribunal held that the claimant had failed to give an acceptable reason why judgment should not be made and had not requested a hearing. It therefore struck out the claim. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment does not identify the substantive claim type in the text, but the GOV.UK listing category for the case is Breach of Contract. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.