Case 8002539/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Gibson v Renfrew Transport Services Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 8002539/2025
- Decision date
- 13 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Whitcombe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Gibson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Whitcombe struck out Mr R Gibson's claim against Renfrew Transport Services Ltd under rule 38(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 on the basis that it had not been actively pursued. The judgment records that no response had been presented to the claim.
The Tribunal found that notice of the final hearing and standard case management orders were issued to the claimant on 1 December 2025, but the claimant did not reply or comply with those orders. Legal Officer Ellison sent a reminder on 13 March 2026 with a reply date of 20 March 2026, and Legal Officer Demir sent a further reminder on 24 March 2026 asking whether the claimant still wished to pursue the claim, with a reply date of 26 March 2026. No reply was received to either reminder.
The final hearing listed for 26 March 2026 was postponed on 25 March 2026 by Vice President Judge Eccles due to the claimant's failure to comply with directions. On 26 March 2026 the Tribunal gave the claimant until 9 April 2026 to give reasons, or request a hearing to put forward reasons, why the claim should not be struck out as not actively pursued. No reply was received, and the claim was struck out. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment struck out the claim as not actively pursued; the judgment text does not set out separate reasoning on this listed head of claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Redundancy | The judgment struck out the claim as not actively pursued; the judgment text does not set out separate reasoning on this listed head of claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment struck out the claim as not actively pursued; the judgment text does not set out separate reasoning on this listed head of claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment struck out the claim as not actively pursued; the judgment text does not set out separate reasoning on this listed head of claim. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 38(1)(d) 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.