Case 3312611/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. Robert Scott v Represented by Ms. E. Christie, Partner Advantage Marketing Corporation Ltd. — 2023
- Case reference
- 3312611/2022
- Decision date
- 31 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tinnion
- Venue
- Glasgow ET
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. Robert Scott
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the final hearing in Glasgow on 29-30 August 2023, Employment Judge Tinnion dealt with three matters. The claimant's claim for a redundancy payment was dismissed on withdrawal under Rule 52.
The respondent's application to strike out the unfair dismissal claim under ss.94-98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, on the basis that it was no longer possible to have a fair hearing, was dismissed. The judgment records that the reasons for the decisions were given orally at the hearing.
The respondent's application to strike out the claimant's breach of contract claim, described as wrongful dismissal/notice pay, under Rule 37(1)(e) was granted. The breach of contract claim was struck out because it was no longer possible to have a fair hearing of that claim. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The claim for a redundancy payment was dismissed on withdrawal under Rule 52. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The respondent's application to strike out the unfair dismissal claim under ss.94-98 ERA 1996, on the basis that it was no longer possible to have a fair hearing, was dismissed. This judgment does not determine the merits of the unfair dismissal claim. | Other | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The respondent's application to strike out the claimant's breach of contract (wrongful dismissal/notice pay) claim under Rule 37(1)(e) was granted, and the claim was struck out on the basis that it was no longer possible to have a fair hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 52
- Rule 37(1)(e)
- ss.94-98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
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.