Case 4100622/2017 · Employment Tribunal
69(scot) claim dismissed on withdrawal rule EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Held at Aberdeen Case No: 4100622/2017 Miss S Lloyd v Represented by: Mr D Purdie - Solicitor Marks & Spencer plc — 2017
- Case reference
- 4100622/2017
- Decision date
- 4 July 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Nicol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
69(scot) claim dismissed on withdrawal rule EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Held at Aberdeen Case No: 4100622/2017 Miss S Lloyd
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal at Aberdeen recorded that the claimant, Miss S Lloyd, had withdrawn the claim. On that basis, Employment Judge Nicol dismissed the claim under Rule 52 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
The extracted judgment does not set out any findings on the substantive merits of the dispute, and it does not identify the underlying claim type in the body of the decision. It is therefore only possible to record that the case ended by dismissal following withdrawal, rather than by a merits determination.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment states that the claim had been withdrawn by the claimant and was dismissed under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The extracted text does not specify the underlying substantive cause of action. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.