Case 8001204/2024 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 8001204/2024 M McCormick v Edinburgh Airport Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 8001204/2024
- Decision date
- 20 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 8001204/2024 M McCormick
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the claim under rule 37 on the basis that it had not been actively pursued. On 19 September 2024 the claimant was asked to provide further information by 10 October 2024, but no further information was provided. A reminder was sent on 15 October 2024, and on 24 October 2024 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons by 7 November 2024 or to request a hearing on whether the claim should be struck out.
On 8 November 2024 the claimant's former solicitor wrote asking that the claim not be struck out at that stage, but said he had no instructions and would withdraw from acting. He also indicated that, if the Tribunal were minded to strike the claim out, he would appreciate the opportunity to address the Tribunal at a hearing. The Tribunal then wrote directly to the claimant on 6 December 2024, stating that the Employment Judge was minded to strike the claim out and giving seven days for a hearing request, but no response was received from either the claimant or Mr Bathgate. The Judge therefore struck out the claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The extracted judgment does not restate the substantive claim type; this classification follows the case listing context, which identified the case as unfair dismissal. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37
- rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.