Case 8000226/2026 · Employment Tribunal
Number: 8000226/2026 Miss G Lockyer v MacDonald Highland Resort Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 8000226/2026
- Decision date
- 27 July 2026
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Kemp Case
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Number: 8000226/2026 Miss G Lockyer
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out Miss G Lockyer's claim against MacDonald Highland Resort Limited under rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because the claim had not been actively pursued, in terms of rule 38(1)(d). The judgment did not decide the claim on its merits and recorded no remedy.
The claimant did not attend a case management hearing on 12 June 2026. A Preliminary Hearing note asked her to confirm by 29 June 2026 whether she wished to proceed, and a reminder issued that day set a further deadline of 6 July 2026. The Tribunal received no response to either letter.
A strike-out warning issued on 8 July 2026 gave the claimant until 22 July 2026 to respond or explain why judgment should not be issued. She did not respond, give reasons against strike-out, or request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The claim was struck out under rule 38(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because it had not been actively pursued. The judgment does not set out the pleaded allegations or determine their merits; the claim type follows the supplied listing category. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 38(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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.