Miss S Smith v Portsonachan Wilderness Lodges Ltd: 8001100/2025
JUDGMENT
The claim is struck out under rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 on the grounds of non compliance with [the Procedure Rules or an Order of the Tribunal in terms of rule 38(1)(c) that the claim has not been actively pursued in terms of rule 38(1)(d)REASONS
[1]The claimant presented a claim to the Employment Tribunal on the 6 May 2025 alleging she had been unfairly dismissed, discriminated against because of the protected characteristic of sex and owed various sums of money.[2]The respondent entered a Response and a preliminary hearing for the purposes of case management took place on the 4 July. The claimant failed to attend that hearing. The Employment Judge issued a Note following the hearing and directed the claimant to respond to a number of questions regarding her claim.[3]The claimant provided a response by email of the 4 August (two weeks late). The response did not answer the questions but instead provided a further narrative. The Employment Judge, by email of the 6 August, directed the claimant to provide a response to each of the questions.[4]The claimant emailed on the 18 August to say she was waiting for an appointment with her legal representative. The Employment Judge extended the time limit for responding to the questions until 1 September.[5]The claimant did not respond by 1 September and so a reminder was sent to her on the 4 September. The claimant did not respond and so a strike out warning letter was sent to the claimant on the 15 September.[6]The claimant has not responded to the questions, or strike out warning letter and has not made any contact with the Tribunal. Accordingly, the claim is struck out in terms of Rule 38(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024 for failure to actively pursue the claim.