Case 4102635/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Lindsay Buchanan v Represented by:15 Mr N Whelan Donaldson Timber Systems Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 4102635/2022
- Decision date
- 17 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ian McPherson
- Venue
- chambers in Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Lindsay Buchanan
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Lindsay Buchanan presented his ET1 on 11 May 2022 after ACAS early conciliation between 5 and 10 May 2022. He alleged unfair dismissal by Donaldson Timber Systems Limited on 24 February 2022 and also alleged unlawful disability discrimination. The claim form was sent to the respondents on 13 May 2022, but no ET3 response was filed by the due date of 10 June 2022 or at all.
Employment Judge Ian McPherson determined on the available material that the unfair dismissal complaint succeeded without a hearing on liability, applying Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. The remedy for that successful claim was not assessed at this stage and was left to a final hearing. The remaining complaint of alleged unlawful disability discrimination was also left for determination at that same hearing. The case management preliminary hearing listed for 6 July 2022 was cancelled, and the claimant was ordered to provide a detailed schedule of loss and supporting documents within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Liability was determined on the available material without a hearing under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. Remedy was not determined in this judgment and was left to a final hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
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.