Case 4112400/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Madden v Waracle Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 4112400/2021
- Decision date
- 23 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Gall
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Madden
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case concerned a disability discrimination claim, with the claimant relying on Charcot Marie Tooth disease and depression and anxiety. At a case management hearing on 17 January 2022, the Tribunal ordered him to provide medical evidence, an impact statement, and details of the basis on which he said the respondents knew or ought to have known of his disability. When those matters were not provided, the Tribunal issued Unless Orders on 28 March 2022 requiring compliance by 18 April 2022.
The claimant sent some medical material, including a GP letter of 1 March 2022, and later said he had been in hospital for surgery and was heavily medicated. The Tribunal accepted that he had health problems and had been hospitalised, but found that the key elements required by the order were still missing: the impact statement and the explanation of the alleged employer knowledge. The respondents submitted that he had been given repeated opportunities to comply and had still not done so.
Applying Rule 38(2), the Tribunal considered the interests of justice and referred to Wentworth-Wood, Kier Highways, Thind, Enamejewa, Singh, Morgan and Polyclear. It found that the claimant had remained able to communicate during hospitalisation, that the unanswered matters were within his own knowledge, and that there was no explanation for why they had not been addressed. The application to set aside the automatic dismissal was refused and the claim remained dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The claim remained dismissed after the Tribunal refused to set aside the automatic dismissal under Rule 38(2); the merits were not determined. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The claim remained dismissed after the Tribunal refused to set aside the automatic dismissal under Rule 38(2); the merits were not determined. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The claim remained dismissed after the Tribunal refused to set aside the automatic dismissal under Rule 38(2); the merits were not determined. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
8 references- Rule 38(2) interests of justice
- Thind factors
- Morgan
- Wentworth-Wood
- Kier Highways
- Enamejewa
- Singh
- Polyclear
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 4 PDF on gov.uk
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.