Case 4110220/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v BD2011 Ltd and Others — 2022
- Case reference
- 4110220/2021
- Decision date
- 25 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Gall Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 25 February 2022 Employment Judge R Gall struck out the responses of the first and second respondents, BD2011 Ltd and Blue Dog Bishopgate Consultants Ltd, under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The stated grounds were non-compliance with the tribunal's order made after the preliminary hearing on 10 November 2021 and that the responses had not been actively pursued.
The tribunal had written to the first and second respondents on 7 February 2022 and gave them until 17 February 2022 either to provide written reasons why strike-out should not be ordered or to request a hearing. They did not provide an acceptable reason or request a hearing, and the tribunal therefore struck out their responses. This judgment is procedural and does not record any substantive findings on the merits of the claim or any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment struck out the responses of the first and second respondents under rule 37. It did not determine the underlying substantive claim(s), so this is recorded as an administrative strike-out rather than a merits decision. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37(1)(c)
- 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.