Case 4113689/2019 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4113689/2019 Mr B Reid v Chivas Brothers Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 4113689/2019
- Decision date
- 29 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Robert Gall
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4113689/2019 Mr B Reid
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 29 September 2021 Employment Judge Robert Gall struck out Mr B Reid's claim against Chivas Brothers Limited under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The stated ground was that the claim had not been actively pursued within rule 37(1)(d).
The reasons record that on 14 September 2021 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 28 September 2021, or to request a hearing to explain why the claim should not be struck out. The claimant did not give an acceptable reason and did not request a hearing.
The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim. No substantive findings on liability or remedy are recorded in the extracted judgment text, and no monetary award is stated.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the substantive legal head of claim; it states only that 'the claim' was struck out under rule 37(1)(d) for not having been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37(1)(d)
- 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.