Case 4110024/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Costa v GEOAmey Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 4110024/2019
- Decision date
- 8 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge I McPherson
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Costa
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr L Costa presented a claim against Geoamey on 13 August 2019 seeking unpaid holiday pay. The matter was not defended. After a final hearing on 25 October 2019, Employment Judge Meiklejohn ordered the claimant to provide further information about his hours of work and earnings for the period 17 October 2018 to 7 January 2019, with a deadline of 11 November 2019.
The claimant did not comply with that order, even after a reminder was issued on 12 November 2019 giving a further 14 days. On 10 December 2019 the tribunal gave him another opportunity to provide written reasons by 24 December 2019, or to request a hearing to explain why the claim should not be struck out. He again failed to reply.
In the absence of any response, the tribunal 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 judgment records no substantive determination of the holiday pay claim and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Claim for unpaid holiday pay was struck out because it had not been actively pursued. The claimant did not provide the additional information ordered on 25 October 2019, did not respond after a reminder, and did not reply to the tribunal's further invitation to give reasons or request a hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 37
- 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.