Case 8000038/2022 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 8000038/2022 Mr L Remenyi v Amazon Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 8000038/2022
- Decision date
- 3 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Amanda Jones
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 8000038/2022 Mr L Remenyi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37 of the Rules in Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, on the ground that it had not been actively pursued in terms of rule 37(1)(d). The judgment records that the claimant's claim form did not include particulars of complaint and referred to an attachment that the administration could not open.
The claimant was asked by letters dated 30 August, 9 September, and 16 September to provide details of his complaint, but did not respond. On 17 October the Tribunal gave him an opportunity to give written reasons by 24 October or request a hearing to explain why the claim should not be struck out. A telephone preliminary hearing for case management took place on 19 October, which the claimant did not attend.
The Tribunal found that the claimant had failed to give an acceptable reason why strike-out judgment should not be made or to request a hearing. The claim was therefore struck out. No remedy was awarded or addressed in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment struck out the claim for not being actively pursued. The judgment text does not identify the substantive particulars of complaint or specify the legal claim type. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37
- 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.