Case 4121751/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L Heatherwick v K.D. Marine Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 4121751/2018
- Decision date
- 1 March 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hosie
- Venue
- Aberdeen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss L Heatherwick
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 8 January 2019, the Tribunal made an order with which the claimant was required to comply. The judgment records that, by 12 February 2019, the Tribunal had given the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 20 February 2019 explaining why the claim should not be struck out, or to request a hearing to consider that issue.
The claimant did not provide an acceptable reason and did not request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, relying on rule 37(1)(c) for non-compliance with a Tribunal order and rule 37(1)(d) on the basis that the claim had not been actively pursued. No substantive merits findings or monetary award are recorded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The decision does not separate the pleaded causes of action; this claim is included from the case listing and was struck out with the rest of the case under rule 37. | Struck out | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The decision does not separately analyse this claim; the judgment strikes out the claim generally under rule 37. | Struck out | Sex | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The decision does not separately analyse this claim; the judgment strikes out the claim generally under rule 37. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 37
- rule 37(1)(c)
- 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.