Case 4112043/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Case Number: 4112043/2018 Miss M Ewing v Glasgow City Council — 2025
- Case reference
- 4112043/2018
- Decision date
- 10 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Frances Eccles
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Case Number: 4112043/2018 Miss M Ewing
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the claim under rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Rules on the ground that it had not been actively pursued under rule 37(1)(d).
The claimant's solicitors had withdrawn from acting, and the Tribunal sent a strike out warning letter after the claimant failed to respond to a status enquiry asking her to confirm her intentions. That correspondence was returned because the claimant no longer resided at the ET1 address.
The Tribunal recorded that the claimant had not provided a new address, leaving it unable to communicate with her or give notice under rule 38(2). It assumed in those circumstances that she no longer wished to pursue the claim and struck it out.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equal pay | The judgment identifies the claim only by the listing category and states that the claim was struck out because it had not been actively pursued; it does not adjudicate the substantive equal pay claim. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 38 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2024
- rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2024
- rule 38(2) of the 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.