Case 4113789/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Toye v Weir & McQuiston (Scotland) Limited (In Administration) — 2022
- Case reference
- 4113789/2021
- Decision date
- 4 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Whitcombe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Toye
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out Mr J Toye's claim against Weir & McQuiston Ltd (In administration) under rule 37 of the Rules contained in Schedule 1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The ground was that the claim had not been actively pursued in terms of rule 37(1)(d).
The reasons record that on 16 March 2022 the claimant was asked to confirm the sums he claimed were owed to him and to provide calculations showing how those sums had been calculated. No reply was received. A reminder was issued on 28 April 2022, again without reply.
On 27 May 2022 the Tribunal gave the claimant the opportunity to give written reasons by 10 June 2022, or to request a hearing, to address why the claim should not be struck out for not being actively pursued. The claimant did not respond, give an acceptable reason why judgment should not be made, or request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim. No remedy or monetary award was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment describes a claim for sums said to be owed and records that it was struck out for not being actively pursued; it does not set out the underlying contractual particulars or any amount claimed. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37(1)(d)
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.