Case 4112736/2015 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4112736/2015 Mr D Cassidy v North Lanarkshire Council — 2023
- Case reference
- 4112736/2015
- Decision date
- 30 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Frances Eccles
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4112736/2015 Mr D Cassidy
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 on the ground that it had not been actively pursued.
The claimant's solicitors had withdrawn, and the tribunal sent correspondence on 16 October 2023 asking the claimant to confirm his intention regarding the claim. The correspondence was returned because the claimant no longer lived at the address on the ET1, and he had not provided a new address.
The tribunal recorded that it could not communicate with the claimant or give notice under rule 37(2). In those circumstances, it assumed that the claimant no longer wished to pursue the claim and struck it out under rule 37(1)(d).
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equal pay | The judgment identifies the claim only as struck out under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued; the equal pay classification is based on the gov.uk listing category rather than detail in the judgment text. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37(1)(d) Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- rule 37(2) 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.