Case 4100277/2017 · Employment Tribunal
69(scot) claim dismissed on withdrawal rule EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: S/4100277/2017 Mr G Pryde v Tayprint Limited — 2017
- Case reference
- 4100277/2017
- Decision date
- 6 June 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Nicol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
69(scot) claim dismissed on withdrawal rule EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: S/4100277/2017 Mr G Pryde
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe extracted judgment is a short disposal judgment in case S/4100277/2017 between Mr G Pryde and Tayprint Limited. It records that the claim was withdrawn by the claimant.
On that basis, Employment Judge Nicol Hosie dismissed the claim under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. No substantive findings on liability, remedy, or the underlying facts are set out in the extracted text.
The judgment is dated 5 June 2017 and was entered in the register on 6 June 2017. The extracted text does not identify any lay members or any legal test beyond Rule 52.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment states only that the claim was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. No substantive cause of action is identified in the extracted text. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.