Miss S Miller v Erskine Hospital Ltd: 4120629/2018
JUDGMENT
OF THE EMPLOYMENT I that she had been unfairly dismissed and discriminated EMPLOYMENT Held in Glasgow on 7 February 2019 Case No: 4120629/2018 Judge: Mr J D Young (sitting alone) presented The respondent admitted dismissal but denied REASONS TRIBUNALS of the claim, the claimant’s a claim to the Employment (SCOTLAND) TRIBUNAL Solicitor Mr L Entwistle - Represented Respondent Not represented No appearance Claimant against on grounds solicitors were Tribunal by: against against and 30 25 20 15 10 f. e. By letter of 21 December d. No information c. By letter dated 28 November 2018, the parties were advised that the b. By email of 23 November 2018, the claimant’s that they were withdrawing from acting for the claimant and any future By email of 27 November 2018, the solicitors for the claimant advised then be considered in chambers. January 2019 to comment on these submissions. Tribunal by 14 January 2019. hearing had been made, submissions should be in the hands of the application for strikeout would be considered and as no request for a with rule 37(c)” of the Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. claimants’ claim which relates to disability be struck out in accordance respondent’s December February 2019 at 10am. preliminary hearing on case management issues would be heard on 7 2018 was discharged. At that time, a case management preliminary hearing of 30 November with appropriate response from the respondent by 12 December 2018. information was to be submitted by the claimant by 7 December 2018; correspondence extension remained in dispute and on what basis. that information, She was also required to provide a schedule of loss. examples; depression (her stated disability) on normal day to day activities with to the respondent of time to deal with these matters and any relevant evidence dealing with her depression. and solicitors was provided subsequent was the respondent a concise statement summarising granted made 2018, the parties were advised that the email by the claimant Then each party would have until 21 application to the was to advise whether disability of 19 effect that "that December and by letter of 12 that solicitors sought an which The matter would the effect of her the On receipt of part of the after some 2018, proposed the 25 20 15 10[4]3. comply with Orders of the Tribunal by the claimant. which had not been actively pursued and that there had been a failure to and thereafter to directions by the Tribunal, I considered that this was a claim In light of the absence of communication application for strikeout should be granted. At the hearing, Mr Entwistle indicated that in light of the procedural history the i. h. By email of 24 January 2019, the claimant g. By email of 14 January 2019, submissions respondent. made for or on behalf of the claimant. At the Preliminary Preliminary Hearing fixed for 7 February 2019. also advised that the strikeout application request should be complied with by 31 January 2019. Parties were December 2018 in respect of the application for strikeout and that the Tribunal that written submissions claimant’s email address. case in relation to disability discrimination respondent email address being given. responsive to correspondence correspondence supporting should be directed to the claimant who was "most Hearing of 7 February 2019, no appearance was its application by email rather than by post” with an from the claimant when represented from her were requested by 21 Appearance was made for the for strikeout of the claimant’s with a copy being sent to the would be discussed at the were received from the was reminded by the to to that part of the claim only. of disability discrimination circumstances the claim was not being actively pursued. because there has been non compliance with an Order of the Tribunal or that ‘at any stage of the proceedings... Rule 37 of the Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 advise that a Tribunal may described. The application for strikeout was limited to the claim Page 4 made by the claimant and so the strikeout relates strike out all or part of a claim or response’ That test has been met in the