Case 4108616/2015 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4108616/2015 Mr C Mitchell v Wood Group Industrial Services Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 4108616/2015
- Decision date
- 12 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4108616/2015 Mr C Mitchell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 12 December 2024 Employment Judge L Wiseman struck out the claim under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 on the ground that it had not been actively pursued within rule 37(1)(d). The reasons record that on 20 November 2024 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 4 December 2024, or to request a hearing to explain why the claim should not be struck out.
The claimant did not provide an acceptable reason why a strike-out order should not be made and did not request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim. The judgment does not record any findings on the underlying merits, liability, or remedy, and no monetary award is stated.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment strikes out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued. The underlying claim type is not stated in the judgment text itself; this classification follows the case listing categories. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment strikes out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued. The underlying claim type is not stated in the judgment text itself; this classification follows the case listing categories. | 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.