Case 4102781/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Member G Coyle Tribunal Member J Whistler Mr H Dulai v Chief Constable Police Service of Scotland — 2022
- Case reference
- 4102781/2020
- Decision date
- 16 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Whitcombe Tribunal
- Venue
- Glasgow
- Panel members
- G Coyle, J Whistler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Member G Coyle Tribunal Member J Whistler Mr H Dulai
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing took place in Glasgow on 14 February 2022. The claimant did not attend, and the tribunal found there had been no relevant message from him. His solicitor, Mr D Japp, said he had had difficulty obtaining instructions the previous week and was not instructed to make applications on the claimant's behalf. No application to postpone the hearing had been made by the claimant or by his representative.
The tribunal noted that the claimant had been represented by solicitors since the claim began on 26 May 2020. It also recorded that no application had previously been made for disclosure of the personnel file, and that the relevance of that file to the issues had not been explained. In the absence of any explanation or communication from the claimant, the tribunal inferred that he had made a conscious decision not to attend.
Applying rule 47 and taking account of the overriding objective, the tribunal dismissed the case. It also noted that the claimant had a burden of proof because he had brought discrimination claims. The judgment records no merits findings and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Dismissed under rule 47 for failure to attend the hearing; no merits determination was made. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Sex discrimination | Dismissed under rule 47 for failure to attend the hearing; no merits determination was made. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 47
- overriding objective
- burden of proof
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.