Case 4111420/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Number: 4111420/2018 Ms C Erentz v Cordia Services LLP Glasgow City Council — 2025
- Case reference
- 4111420/2018
- Decision date
- 27 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge F Eccles Case
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Number: 4111420/2018 Ms C Erentz
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the claim under rule 38 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2024 on the ground that it had not been actively pursued.
The reasons given were that the claimant's solicitors had withdrawn, the claimant had not replied to a status enquiry asking her to confirm her intention regarding the claim, and correspondence sent to the address on the ET1 had been returned indicating she no longer lived there. The Tribunal recorded that the claimant had not provided a new address, meaning it could not communicate with her or give notice under rule 38(2), and assumed that she no longer wished to pursue the claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equal pay | The judgment identifies the claim as struck out for not being actively pursued. The specific pleaded equal pay issues are not described in the judgment text. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 38(1)(d) Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2024
- rule 38(2) Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2024
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.