Case 4110273/2015 · Employment Tribunal
Mr W Nicholson & others v (see attached schedule) Oban Express Parcel Services Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 4110273/2015
- Decision date
- 10 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Robert Gall
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr W Nicholson & others
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 11 January 2021, Employment Judge Robert Gall gave the claimants an opportunity to provide written reasons by 25 January 2021, or to request a hearing to consider why the claims should not be struck out. The judgment records Mr W Nicholson and four other claimants, and the case was decided in Glasgow on 10 February 2021.
The claimants did not give an acceptable reason why a strike-out order should not be made and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore struck out the claims under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 on the basis that the claims had not been actively pursued, within rule 37(1)(d).
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The extracted judgment text does not specify the underlying cause of action, but the case listing context identifies unlawful deduction from wages as one of the claim categories. The tribunal struck out the claims under rule 37 because they had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The extracted judgment text does not specify the underlying cause of action, but the case listing context identifies working time regulations as one of the claim categories. The tribunal struck out the claims under rule 37 because they had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37(1)(d) actively pursued
- rule 37 of the 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.