Case 4102058/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Mr KS Gilmour v East Dunbartonshire Council — 2017
- Case reference
- 4102058/2017
- Decision date
- 11 August 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ian McPherson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr KS Gilmour
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal entered judgment under Rule 21. The claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal and breach of contract by failure to pay notice pay both succeeded.
The respondent was sent the claim form on 3 July 2017 and was required to enter a response within 28 days, but failed to do so. The Employment Judge decided that liability could properly be determined on the available material without a hearing, but remedy could not.
The claimant was directed to confirm whether he still sought reinstatement or re-engagement and to provide a detailed schedule of loss. Remedy was to be determined by an Employment Judge at a hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Liability succeeded under Rule 21; remedy was left to be determined at a hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract complaint was described as failure to pay notice pay and succeeded; remedy was left to be determined at a hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 16 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.