Case 4101052/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Hugh Robb v South Lanarkshire College — 2021
- Case reference
- 4101052/2020
- Decision date
- 30 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ian McPherson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Hugh Robb
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that Mr Hugh Robb withdrew his complaint of indirect disability discrimination, contrary to section 19 of the Equality Act 2010, by email sent to the Tribunal on 11 December 2020 and copied to the respondent’s representative. The tribunal noted that this part of the claim was dismissed under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
The judgment also states that the remaining part of the claim, complaining of unfair dismissal contrary to section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, was unaffected by the withdrawal and would proceed as separately ordered by the Tribunal. No merits finding or remedy was recorded in this judgment for the unfair dismissal complaint.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The claimant’s complaint of indirect disability discrimination contrary to section 19 Equality Act 2010 was withdrawn by email sent on 11 December 2020 and copied to the respondents’ representative. The judgment states that this part of the claim was dismissed under Rule 52 of the 2013 Rules. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.