Case 8000841/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Gibson v Renfrewshire Warehousing & Distribution Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 8000841/2025
- Decision date
- 13 February 2026
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S MacLean
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Gibson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent company had been dissolved. The tribunal told the claimant by letter dated 6 June 2025 that the company would need to be restored to the Register at Companies House for the case to proceed, and the case was sisted for six months.
On 17 December 2025 the tribunal asked the claimant to confirm that action had been taken to restore the company. No reply was received, and a reminder issued on 12 January 2026 also went unanswered. The tribunal then gave the claimant an opportunity on 27 January 2026 to explain why the claim should not be struck out for not being actively pursued, with a reply due by 10 February 2026.
No response was received by the deadline, and the tribunal struck out the claim under rule 38(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 on the ground that it had not been actively pursued. No merits findings or monetary award were made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the substantive causes of action; it states only that 'the claim' was struck out under rule 38(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because it had not been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
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.