Case 8000538/2024 · Employment Tribunal
R Plachetkova v Telecom Service Centres Ltd t/a Concentrix — 2024
- Case reference
- 8000538/2024
- Decision date
- 20 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S MacLean
Parties
2 namedClaimant
R Plachetkova
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 24 April 2024, R Plachetkova presented claims of disability discrimination and unfair dismissal against Telecom Service Centres Ltd t/a Concentrix. The respondent lodged an ET3 in time. On 11 June 2024, the Tribunal asked for further information about the disability discrimination complaint, but no reply was received. The Tribunal then issued a rule 27(1) notice on 28 June 2024 stating that the disability discrimination claim would be dismissed unless written representations were made. No representations were received, and on 22 July 2024 the parties were told that the disability discrimination complaint had been dismissed. No application for reconsideration was made.
The unfair dismissal claim was allowed to proceed to final hearing on 23 July 2024, and the claimant was ordered to provide a written statement setting out her financial loss and the remedy sought within 21 days. She did not comply, and a reminder issued on 16 August 2024 also received no response. After the respondent applied for strike out on 2 September 2024, the Tribunal gave the claimant a further opportunity to explain by 19 September 2024 or request a hearing. No reply was received, including in response to the Tribunal's request for comments on the respondent's remote-attendance application of 18 September 2024.
Employment Judge S MacLean held that the claimant had not given an acceptable reason why judgment should not be made and had not requested a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim under rule 37 on the basis that it was not being actively pursued. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The disability discrimination complaint was dismissed after the Tribunal asked for further information on 11 June 2024, received no reply, and then issued a rule 27(1) notice on 28 June 2024. No written representations were received, the parties were notified on 22 July 2024 that the complaint had been dismissed, and no reconsideration application was made. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal claim was struck out under rule 37(1)(d) on the basis that it was not being actively pursued. The claimant did not comply with the order to provide a written statement of financial loss and remedy sought, did not respond to a reminder, and did not reply to the Tribunal's further correspondence or request a hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
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.