Case 8000121/2023 · Employment Tribunal
M Mackay v Life Technologies Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 8000121/2023
- Decision date
- 9 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge P O’Donnell
Parties
2 namedClaimant
M Mackay
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the preliminary hearing on 17 May 2023, Employment Judge Meiklejohn issued case management orders requiring the claimant to provide further specification of his claims within 28 days of the Preliminary Hearing Note being issued. On 3 July 2023 the claimant sought a further 28-day extension, and the respondent objected and applied for strike out or, alternatively, a deposit order.
On 11 July 2023 Employment Judge P O'Donnell refused the requested extension and instead allowed 7 days for compliance with the Tribunal's order and a response to the respondent's applications. No reply was received. On 20 July 2023 the Tribunal gave the claimant a further opportunity to provide written reasons by 27 July 2023, or to request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out, but the claimant did not respond.
The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim under rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure on the grounds that the claimant had not complied with Tribunal orders and had not actively pursued the claim. The judgment records no substantive determination of liability and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment struck out the claim as a whole under rule 37(1)(c) and (d) for non-compliance with Tribunal orders and failure to actively pursue the case; no merits findings were made on this claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment struck out the claim as a whole under rule 37(1)(c) and (d) for non-compliance with Tribunal orders and failure to actively pursue the case; no merits findings were made on this claim. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment struck out the claim as a whole under rule 37(1)(c) and (d) for non-compliance with Tribunal orders and failure to actively pursue the case; no merits findings were made on this claim. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37(1)(c) and (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.