Mr P McNeil v Smart Utilities Scotland Ltd: 8001363/2024
JUDGMENT
The claim is struck out under the provisions of rule 38(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 on the basis that it has not been actively pursued.REASONS
[1]The claimant did not attend the preliminary hearing set down for 11 December 2024. The preliminary hearing note required the claimant by no later than 20 December 2024 the claimant must write to the Tribunal and the respondent explaining his failure to attend the hearing today or to complete a case management agenda, confirming that he still pursues the claim. No reply was received.[2]Due to an admin oversight, the file in this case was not referred to the Judge until 31 March 2025, By letter dated 31 March 2025, the claimant was ordered to complete the Agenda by 14 April 2025. The claimant replied on 9 April 2025 stating he wished to proceed with this matter. The claimant did not return the Agenda. By letter dated 28 April 2025 the claimant was required to comply with the Order in the Tribunal's letter of 31 March 2025. No reply was received.[3]On 27 June 2025 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to give reasons by 4 July 2025 why the claim should not be struck out as it had not been actively pursued. The time limit for doing so passed and the claimant did not respond.[4]The claimant replied on 9 July 2025 stating that “I’m sorry but I have no way of knowing anything if people aren’t involving me with dates etc I’ve replied to everything that’s ever been sent. I may also point out my emails have been overlooked in the past”.[5]The Tribunal acknowledged the claimant’s correspondence on 11 July 2025 advising that his correspondence would not be actioned unless it was copied to the other side in accordance with rule 90 and confirmed to the Tribunal that he had done so. Enclosed were further copies of the correspondence to which the Tribunal had received no reply from the claimant.[6]The claimant replied on 11 July 2025 stating “I’m uncertain as to what is actually going on here as I’ve stated I did attend the original hearing but had technical issues I spoke with someone that very same day then I heard nothing for a good few weeks. I was later sent an email there had been an issue on your end (you can check this for yourself ) I’m very sorry for the confusion but I’m not getting anytime to get my case heard. I’m more than determined to take this down what ever road it may be as I’m not willing to let mr smart away what he has done I do not tolerate bully’s I expect respect where I ever I work no matter the circumstances or background.” The correspondence was not copied to the respondent. By e-mail dated 18 July 2025 the claimant was reminded he must copy all correspondence to the respondent and was sent a further copy of the Tribunals letter dated 31 March 2025 to reply within 7 days.[7]The claimant replied on 18 July 2025 stating “it’s just a quick one on the letter it says no later than April 2025 which has passed I’m having serious issues trying to communicate with someone over this matter. As at the very first I couldn’t join on the Vidieo and since then it’s just been a mess if I’m honest there was an IT error on your end which I have proof of as I got an apology email. I’m wanting my side heard as what they’ve put me and my family through is nothing short of a nightmare at the time”. By letter dated 28 July 2025 the Tribunal wrote to the claimant once again reminding him that he must comply with rule 90 and copy the correspondence to the respondent. The claimant was once again directed to lodge a written reply to the Tribunals correspondence dated 31 March 2025 and also enclosed another copy of preliminary hearing note and order by 5 August 2025. No reply was received.[8]On 21 August 2025 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to give reasons by 4 September 2025 why the claim should not be struck out as it had not been actively pursued. The time limit for so doing has passed and the claimant has failed to respond.[9]The claim is therefore struck out under the provisions of rule 38(1)(d) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 on the ground that it has not been actively pursued.