Ms J Houston v Greater Glasgow and Clyde: 121942/2006
JUDGMENT
The claim is struck out under rule 37 of the Rules contained in Schedule 1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 on the grounds that the claim has not been actively pursued in terms of rule 37(1)(d).REASONS
[1]The claimant's solicitors having withdrawn from acting on her behalf, a strike out warning letter was sent to her on 31 May 2017 on the direction of an Employment Judge, following the claimant’s failure to reply to the Tribunal’s status enquiry letter asking for confirmation of her intention with regard to this claim.[2]A telephone call was received on 12 June 2017 from a Mrs Wilson who resides at the address we hold for the claimant. She advised that the claimant has not lived there for some time and that she has no forwarding address.[3]No steps have been taken by the claimant to advise the Tribunal of her new address. In the absence of this information the tribunal cannot communicate with the claimant. The Tribunal have been unable to give the claimant notice under rule 37(2) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.[4]The Tribunal assumes in these circumstances that she no longer wishes to pursue her claim, which is struck out under rule 37(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.