Case 4110123/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Frankgate v N-Sea Offshore Limited (In Administration) — 2022
- Case reference
- 4110123/2021
- Decision date
- 26 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Whitcombe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Frankgate
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37 of the Rules in Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The stated ground was that the claim had not been actively pursued in terms of rule 37(1)(d).
The Tribunal recorded that it wrote to the claimant on 20 January 2022 seeking further information, including calculations of sums still claimed after credit for sums received from public funds, and again on 9 March 2022 reminding him to reply. No reply was received. On 3 May 2022 the Tribunal gave the claimant until 17 May 2022 to provide written reasons or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out, and no reply was received.
The Tribunal found that the claimant had failed to give an acceptable reason why such a judgment should not be made or to request a hearing, and therefore struck out the claim.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The gov.uk listing categorised the case as including breach of contract, but the judgment itself only states that the claim was struck out and does not set out the individual pleaded heads of claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Redundancy | The gov.uk listing categorised the case as including redundancy, but the judgment itself only states that the claim was struck out and does not set out the individual pleaded heads of claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The gov.uk listing categorised the case as including unlawful deduction from wages, but the judgment itself only states that the claim was struck out and does not set out the individual pleaded heads of claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The gov.uk listing categorised the case as including Working Time Regulations, but the judgment itself only states that the claim was struck out and does not set out the individual pleaded heads of claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | The gov.uk listing categorised the case as including a protective award, but the locked taxonomy has no specific protective award category and the judgment itself does not give further detail. | 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.