Case 4123009/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R McIntyre v Respondent — 2019
- Case reference
- 4123009/2018
- Decision date
- 20 March 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge David Hoey
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr R McIntyre
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr R McIntyre brought claims for unfair dismissal, redundancy payment and holiday pay. The respondent did not lodge a response. Both parties were notified by letter dated 12 February 2019 that a final hearing would take place on 19 March 2019 in Glasgow, but when the case called neither party appeared or was represented.
The Employment Judge directed the clerk to telephone the parties. The claimant said he had not realised the hearing was that day, and the respondent said it had not received the letter. The tribunal referred to Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, which allows dismissal where a party fails to attend after reasonably practicable enquiries have been made, and to Rule 2, requiring cases to be dealt with justly while avoiding delay and saving expense.
Because the notice of hearing had been issued and expense had been incurred, the tribunal decided it was in the interests of justice to dismiss the claims. The judgment states that the claim was dismissed, and the claimant was told he could seek reconsideration under Rule 70 if he considered it in the interests of justice to do so. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because neither party attended or was represented at the final hearing; the tribunal did not determine the merits of the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | Dismissed because neither party attended or was represented at the final hearing; the tribunal did not determine the merits of the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Dismissed because neither party attended or was represented at the final hearing; the tribunal did not determine the merits of the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Rule 2 of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Rule 70 of the Employment Tribunal (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.