Case 4112063/2018 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4112063/2018 Miss V Friel v Glasgow City Council r f ■. — 2024
- Case reference
- 4112063/2018
- Decision date
- 17 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge F Eccles Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4112063/2018 Miss V Friel
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Miss V Friel's claim against Glasgow City Council under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 on the ground that it had not been actively pursued. On 17 May 2024, the tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 7 June 2024, or to request a hearing, to explain why the claim should not be struck out.
The claimant did not give an acceptable reason why the claim should not be struck out and did not request a hearing. The tribunal therefore made the strike-out order under rule 37(1)(d). The judgment records no substantive findings on the merits and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equal pay | The tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 because it had not been actively pursued. The judgment does not determine the merits of any equal pay issue. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 because it had not been actively pursued. The judgment does not determine the merits of any working time issue. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 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.