Case 4100649/2017 · Employment Tribunal
69(scot) claim dismissed on withdrawal rule EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Held at Aberdeen Case No: 4100649/2017 Miss L Grant v Represented by: Mr R Phillips - Solicitor Kevin Eddie — 2017
- Case reference
- 4100649/2017
- 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: 4100649/2017 Miss L Grant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that Miss L Grant withdrew the claim against the third respondent, Mr Kevin Eddie. The tribunal therefore dismissed that claim under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
No substantive findings on liability, discrimination, dismissal, or remedy are set out in the extracted text. The single paragraph of reasons is limited to the procedural dismissal following withdrawal, and the PDF text does not identify the specific nature of the underlying claim against the third respondent.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment states that the claim against the third respondent, Mr Kevin Eddie, was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The extracted text does not identify the underlying claim type. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.