Case 4120175/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Whyte v Westgate Farm — 2018
- Case reference
- 4120175/2018
- Decision date
- 30 November 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shona MacLean
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Whyte
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 29 October 2018 the tribunal wrote to Mr S Whyte enclosing the respondent's response form and a covering letter from Westgate Farm stating that the claim had been settled. Mr Whyte was asked to provide comments by 9 November 2018, but none were received, including after a further reminder sent on 14 November 2018.
On 20 November 2018 the tribunal gave the claimant another opportunity to provide written reasons by 23 November 2018 or to request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out. No acceptable reason was provided and no hearing was requested. Employment Judge Shona MacLean therefore struck out the claim under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 on the ground that it had not been actively pursued. The judgment is dated 28 November 2018 and entered in the register on 30 November 2018.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment strikes out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued. The extracted judgment text does not separately discuss this head, but the case listing identifies unlawful deduction from wages as one of the listed categories. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment strikes out the claim under rule 37(1)(d) for not being actively pursued. The extracted judgment text does not separately discuss this head, but the case listing identifies working time as one of the listed categories. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- 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.