Case 4107669/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Number: 4107669/2024 Mr W McMurray v Findlay Contracts Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 4107669/2024
- Decision date
- 11 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Wiseman Case
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Number: 4107669/2024 Mr W McMurray
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Judge struck out the claim under rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 on the ground that it had not been actively pursued. The tribunal record states that on 12 May 2025 the claimant's representative withdrew after reporting no communication from the claimant for more than two months, and that correspondence should then be sent directly to the claimant.
The tribunal wrote to the claimant on 16 May 2025 asking him to confirm whether he still wished to pursue the claim. No response was received. The respondent then applied on 27 May 2025 for strike out on the basis that the claim was no longer actively pursued, and that application was copied to the claimant with details of the respondent's attempts to contact him.
On 30 May 2025 the tribunal gave the claimant until 9 June 2025 to provide written reasons why the claim should not be struck out, or to request a hearing. The claimant did not give an acceptable reason and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claim. No merits findings or remedy awards were made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the underlying pleaded claim types; it states only that the claim was struck out under rule 38 for not being actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 38 Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- rule 38(1)(d) not actively pursued
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.